Comments on: Updated: Pregnancy Plague

By: Pam

Pam — Tue, 24 Jun 2008 04:18:24 +0000

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.

By: Barbara Grant

Barbara Grant — Mon, 23 Jun 2008 22:55:50 +0000

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.

By: EN

EN — Mon, 23 Jun 2008 05:31:56 +0000

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.

By: Myron Pauli

Myron Pauli — Mon, 23 Jun 2008 03:48:22 +0000

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).

By: Bucktowndusty @ FromThePen.com

Bucktowndusty @ FromThePen.com — Mon, 23 Jun 2008 01:31:15 +0000

Alas, you won’t hear critical thought like this in the main stream. I doubt anyone but you had made this connection.

Buck

By: Steve Stip

Steve Stip — Sun, 22 Jun 2008 23:59:46 +0000

When there are fools
(as a general rule),
it’s the result of government schools.