printTIME:
“As summer vacation begins, 17 girls at Gloucester High School are expecting babies—more than four times the number of pregnancies the 1,200-student school had last year. … none older than 16.”
Question: Why aren’t the minors being removed from their parents? Were they not impregnated under their watch? What is good for the FLDS goose must surely be good for the Gloucester gander.
Recall, just a few weeks back, “Texas Department of Child Abduction” removed hundreds of children from the sect known as the Fundamentalist Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saint. The justification for such overreach was molestation: The kids were all being molested, Texas claimed. The alleged evidence was wide-spread pregnancy among the seized children. Nothing panned out. The entire case was based on a hunch and a hoax.
The same standards, surely, would have to apply to Muslim brides being imported, wed, and impregnated before reaching the age of majority.
Update (June 23): Compared to the promiscuity among minors in this Massachusetts school, the FLDS sect’s 15-year-olds are celibate. Or perhaps sterile (it must be all that organic food they eat).
When there are fools
(as a general rule),
it’s the result of government schools.
Alas, you won’t hear critical thought like this in the main stream. I doubt anyone but you had made this connection.
Buck
100 years ago, it was rather common for 16 year olds to be able to assume responsibility. The trends of late have been: (1) infantization of “children” (2) removal of any sense of responsibility and (3) removal of sexual taboos.
It is quite common for “children” in their late 20’s to still be living at home with their parents, even older “adults” who have no sense of financial responsibility, other “adults” who have no concept of how to raise the kids they produce – all modern products of the welfare-credit-card state. We now have a 21 year old drinking age and numerous socialistic nonsense being done in the name of “children”. In short, to the statists, we are ALL children. And most of us, in turn, play the roles required of us and act the part (of children).
In the case of the FLDS it seemed like a double edged sword for the government. If they were consistent then a large segment of the black community and and a not so small portion of the white community would be eligible for government intervention. Child Protective Services would need more money and personnel to run that kind of operation then presently exists in the US GDP. Might as well call it what it would become, that is, civil war.
This story is appalling. Who is going to take care of these kids (the babies, that is)? The parents of the teens? The Massachusetts child welfare system? In any case, the little ones are in for a rocky ride, thanks to the total irresponsibility of their soon-to-be “mothers.” Getting pregnant seems to be taken with the same seriousness and consideration by these girls as getting a hamburger for lunch. (Actually, they probably think more critically about what to eat–you know, calories and all.)
By contrast, any child born to an FLDS mother was immediately in an environment where he or she was not only wanted, but taken care of.
Ilana, when you wrote earlier about the narcissism of young American women–people like Miley Cyrus and the gal who wanted to bare it all on a Southwest Airlines flight–I admit I didn’t see the issue for what it was. Now, I have no doubt. It’s “me, me, me!” with no consequences for irresponsible behavior on the part of those who indulge in it. While I am absolutely opposed to any attempt to legislate morality, I find it sad that so much of our Judeo-Christian value system has collapsed.
If the same standards were to apply between the FLDS and Gloucester High ‘compounds’, law enforcement would need to remove from their homes not only the known teen mothers, but all children of anyone who has a child enrolled in that school.