Quote
lenona

Quote
trekkie monster

Quote
lenona

Quote
blondie
Whenever girls got inpig in h.s. it seems the duhs were never fellow students. It was always some guy a couple years older or from some other town.

According to one source, when it comes to a pregnant girl under 14, in particular, the man is over 20 two-thirds of the time. Don't know about girls in the 14-17 range.

Couldn't they get those guys for statutory rape?

Sure, but often, the girls are already pregnant, and legally, no one can force a girl into having an abortion.

Still, if they prosecuted all those baby-daddies to the full extent of the law, they would become more careful about fucking without protection.
I think that breeders might actually support this. Few people want college-aged punks sticking their dicks in their middle-school aged princesses.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
" ... what's one more once you've already got two shedding on the couch?"

Quote
trekkie monster
Still, if they prosecuted all those baby-daddies to the full extent of the law, they would become more careful about fucking without protection.
I think that breeders might actually support this. Few people want college-aged punks sticking their dicks in their middle-school aged princesses.

Very few parents are opposed to statutory-rape laws in general, especially when there's at least a 4-year difference, since in such cases, most people have little sympathy for any man or teenage boy who wails "how was I supposed to know her age?"

However, when the girls are under 14, it's probably safe to say that they are very, very neglected. Even BNPs usually love their daughters enough that they don't need reminders to make themselves a visible threat to any local pedophiles. (BTW, I doubt that more than 1% of such men in their 20s ever went to college.)

Quote
Zzelda
About pregnant girls in HS - if they can keep up with the work, I say let them stay. Treat it as any other medical issue.

I had to sit and think about that for awhile because I just can't agree.

Cancer is a medical issue, flu is a medical issue, even zits can be a medical issue. Pregnancy is not a medical issue. It's a biological process that, proceeding at a healthy pace, does not require medical intervention - indeed, for millions of years, the biological process of pregnancy was in no way attended by medical intervention. Ancient human ancestors merely dropped the kid, disposed of the placenta, stuck it to her breast and went back to swinging in the tree. Now, some of the side effects of this reproductive process may require a medical approach, but that's not a universal occurrence.

Also, this process is a choice. When the choice is made in such an irresponsible manner as getting pregnant in the middle of attaining your basic (and necessary) education, I don't think it should be without consequences. These young women should not be allowed to say "oh, I'm pregnant", and then proceed as if this is just an inconsequential incident.

My one qualm is how do you distribute the consequences of such an irresponsible decision equally between the two people who committed the act. The schools take an easy out toward the female - she's the one with the obviously ballooning belly. However, the male is equally responsible for the occurrence of this condition. So, what is to be done to him?

Getting pregnant that early in life is just wrong. There is no valid reason to make that choice or be so irresponsible that it happens. To say "oh well, carry on" is to show tolerance when everything that can be done should be done to discourage these young people - even stern consequences. The only issue I see is that both parties should suffer the consequences when that is very rarely the case.

The preggos in my school (there were only a few) in the eighties were 16 or 17 and the babbyduddies were 18-19 and either had graduated or were from different towns. No one tried to prosecute them, one couple got married and still is last I knew.

Who the hell knows, now it's prolly cool to be a pregnut couple in the same high school.

Dorisan, I hear what you're saying.

And I kind of think they should be separated too -

But on the other side of the coin - that's making them 'special' and I don't think they should be treated that way. Good or bad special. They should be made to face life like all others. No special accommodations, if they can keep up fine, if they can't, they can go.

And what about the fathers?

One thing I really dislike about the "shaming" aspect is - well, there are several things. Monetarily, this puts the woman and child at a disadvantage and they likely will be forced to go on welfare.

Another personal angle to me is - I am the child of *divorce*. And my parents were married for close to a decade, they did not do anything 'wrong' or 'shameful' - my "father" decided to turn himself into an asshole - this was not my Mom's fault - and it was certainly NOT my (or siblings) fault.

Yet - from growing up in a highly Conservative area - we were looked at with many side eyes. There was much 'talk'. My Mom was whispered about as if she was some 'wanton woman' - for being a Divorcee. And this was in the 80s. She was looked at as 'no good' - but it wasn't HER fault - AT ALL! The fault lied SOLELY with my father who took up drink and drugs, and then ran off with another woman! HIS choice!

And worse - I was looked at funny at talked about. Why me? I didn't ask for this. All of the people where I grew up became so rude and mean. They shoved me through not only the Jewish Temple but also Christian Church - I think they were so looking for some people who weren't assholes - but - they all were. The so called "Chosen Ones" and "Children of God"

They weren't very 'God like' to us ~

I do not believe in any 'shaming' ideas. It hurts innocent children. And like I say - I wasn't even illegitimate, born from a teen Mom, none of that - my parents were married for quite some time, had money, the house, the white picket fence - the whole shebang. We even had a duck pond in front of the house. They did it all 'right' - and it was my asshole father who threw it all away.

Why should my Mom - or Me - be blamed for that?

My Mom had to go to work to support us, she had to work 10 times harder than most people.

She was able to go to school and advance herself. She is now VP at the company she works with. I am glad that some people were open minded and gave her a chance.

I don't want to see things go back to the dark ages where women are blamed - when it *might not be* their fault.

All I wish to see is EQUAL OPPORTUNITY for ALL. No special treatment. Positive or Negative. Let all compete fairly. And do not shame or penalize people for something that may not be of their doing.

I am PRO CHOICE - which also means that if there is a girl who gets pregnant in the heat of the moment, or her BF talked her into sex, and then walks away - I support her choice - if she wants to keep the baby - it's HER CHOICE.

I'm not in love with the idea - but - if I am Pro Choice - I feel I must be Pro Choice for ALL.

And there are often extenuating circumstances that people are unaware of.

Like the Single Mom who's sneered at - but - her Husband died in the war. This is why we must be open minded. Or, like my Mom - who was long term married and did everything *right* - it is not her fault that her H decided to become an asshole. And it sure as shit ain't my fault, either.

I cannot tell you how many people looked down upon ME - just because my parents got divorced. This was my fault - how?

Yet more reasons I am a Liberal. I feel we must take into account *the individual*.

Quote
Zzelda

Yet more reasons I am a Liberal. I feel we must take into account *the individual*.

There are over 300 million people in this country. There needs to be a balance of taking the individual AND the society into account.

Quote
lenona

Quote
trekkie monster

Quote
lenona

Quote
blondie
Whenever girls got inpig in h.s. it seems the duhs were never fellow students. It was always some guy a couple years older or from some other town.

According to one source, when it comes to a pregnant girl under 14, in particular, the man is over 20 two-thirds of the time. Don't know about girls in the 14-17 range.

Couldn't they get those guys for statutory rape?

Sure, but often, the girls are already pregnant, and legally, no one can force a girl into having an abortion.

They can't make her have an abortion, but couldn't the girl's parents still put the baby up for adoption?

Quote
nightfire

Quote
lenona

Quote
trekkie monster

Quote
lenona

Quote
blondie
Whenever girls got inpig in h.s. it seems the duhs were never fellow students. It was always some guy a couple years older or from some other town.

According to one source, when it comes to a pregnant girl under 14, in particular, the man is over 20 two-thirds of the time. Don't know about girls in the 14-17 range.

Couldn't they get those guys for statutory rape?

Sure, but often, the girls are already pregnant, and legally, no one can force a girl into having an abortion.

They can't make her have an abortion, but couldn't the girl's parents still put the baby up for adoption?

In some states, yes. In most of the world that would involve a lengthy court process and the parents who try to do that would have a hard time finding a lawyer who would represent them.