No Flood Insurance  |   Home  |   There’s No Crying in Murder Trials

Like, omigahhh, I’m pregnant, too!

When I was in high school, a handful of my friends and I decided that we would all wear the same shirt on a specific day.  When that day arrived, only two of us remembered.  We couldn’t even get it together enough to wear the same shirt, I can’t imagine what would have happened if we had all tried to get knocked up at the same time.  Worse, I can only imagine what the two rememberers would have said if they were the only ones to fulfill the pact and the rest of us didn’t seal the deal. 

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.

...

By May, several students had returned multiple times to get pregnancy tests, and on hearing the results, “some girls seemed more upset when they weren’t pregnant than when they were,” Sullivan says. All it took was a few simple questions before nearly half the expecting students, none older than 16, confessed to making a pact to get pregnant and raise their babies together.

Surely there was a better way to cement their friendships than to guarantee a harder life for themselves and their offspring.  What the hell were they thinking?

Posted by Wendy at 1827 hrs
Culture

1. Unbelievably disconcerting. Where the hell were their parents?

   Posted by Cindy on June 19, 2008 at 1853 hrs
   
   
   

2. Honest-to-God, the first thing I thought of when I saw this story on Drudge was that the girls had decided to help each other raise their kids as part of the pact.  Because they must have figured out by now that the ‘sperm donors’ weren’t going to be around to help.

   Sure enough… “get pregnant and raise their babies together”

   After the Great Society and the War on Poverty I’m surprised this didn’t happen sooner.

   Anyone want to re-think criticizing those polygamy cults, now?  That’s just another version of this same pact, but at least there’s one father present and willing to support the women and children.

   This must be an anthropologist’s dream research project.

   Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on June 19, 2008 at 1905 hrs
   
   
   

3. More and more liberal programs…less and less reality and responsibility.

   Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on June 19, 2008 at 2153 hrs
   
   
   

4. If certain liberals had their way, the MA CPS would burst into the school and take all the children and put them foster homes, the same thing that happened in Texas.  But here, the silence is deafing from the liberals.

   Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on June 20, 2008 at 0029 hrs
   
   
   

5. If certain liberals had their way, the MA CPS would burst into the school and take all the children and put them foster homes, the same thing that happened in Texas.  But here, the silence is deafing from the liberals.

   Please explain to me how this is a liberal vs conservative issue?

   Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on June 20, 2008 at 0903 hrs
   
   
   

6. I agree with Mr./Ms. Lefty. How did this become the fault of ‘certain liberals’, the Great Society and War on Poverty.

   I don’t follow the logic.

   I would assume that the right-wing would declare that the liberals would now demand ‘a whole bunch of abortions’, or words to that effect.

   Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on June 20, 2008 at 1304 hrs
   
   
   

7. I followed the link - here’s some more quotables - usually I don’t fall for the liberal vs conservative back & forth, but this time I think there is some relavance.

   The high school has done perhaps too good a job of embracing young mothers. Sex-ed classes end freshman year at Gloucester, where teen parents are encouraged to take their children to a free on-site day-care center. Strollers mingle seamlessly in school hallways among cheerleaders and junior ROTC. “We’re proud to help the mothers stay in school,” says Sue Todd, CEO of Pathways for Children, which runs the day-care center.

   Gloucester’s elected school committee plans to vote later this summer on whether to provide contraceptives. But that won’t do much to solve the issue of teens wanting to get pregnant.

   Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on June 20, 2008 at 1508 hrs
   
   
   

8. Obviously the liberals would have had these pregnancies terminated (sarcasm).

   So, I guess only conservatives help mothers?

   I don’t get it. What do you want? Liberals advocating abortion, or these “blessed, precious, helpless, G-d’s little angels cared for”.

   Right wingers seem aimed to argue out of both sides of their orifice’s.

   Maybe the school should have just ignored the usual four or five girls that got pregnant every year. No baby strollers, no nothing.

   Once the kid pops out, they’re on their own!

   Then there wouldn’t be 17 pregnant girls this year!

   That’s the solution!

   How stupid.  I wonder how many of these girls belong to some kind of goofy fundamentalist church.  Probably more than a few, even in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts.

   After all, nutty fundamentalism started out there in the 1600’s. Evil, nasty, wicked, wanton women were burned at the stake back then.

   Is this the solution?

   This isn’t ‘a blame the right-wing or blame the liberals problem’.

   Oh, that it could be so cookie cutter easy.

   Maybe the solution is to sic the Swift Boaters on the girls’ parents. Put them to some good use for once.

   Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on June 20, 2008 at 1608 hrs
   
   
   

9. I wonder how many of these girls belong to some kind of goofy fundamentalist church.  Probably more than a few, even in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts.

   Here’s more from the article:

   The question of what to do next has divided this fiercely Catholic enclave.

   Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on June 20, 2008 at 1801 hrs
   
   
   

10. Well, thanks Mr./Ms. mht.

    We all know how those Catholic voters are when it comes to supporting ‘pro-abortion’ Democrats.

    Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on June 20, 2008 at 1830 hrs
    
    
    

11. Damn, why didn’t I think of that?

    Posted by HeatherRadish on June 20, 2008 at 2006 hrs
    
    
    

12. What we all “know” depends on whether or not we subscribe to “the myth of the Catholic Voter”.  Google that.

    In 2004 Bush had 52% of Catholic vote, versus Kerry at 47%; in 2000 Gore had 50% to Bush’s 47%

    http://www.catholicvote.net/research_polls/catholic_vote/index.htm

    One thing that has remained constant about the Catholic vote over the last 27 years is its accuracy in determining the outcome of the election. Exit polls have shown that Catholics voted mostly for Richard Nixon in 1972, Jimmy Carter in ’76, Ronald Reagan in ’80 and ’84, George Bush in ’88, and Bill Clinton in ’92 and ’96. In the presidential election of 2000, Catholics comprised 26% of the voters and they favored Democrat Al Gore by the slight margin of 2 percentage points over Republican George W. Bush (49% to 47%). In a close race, Vice President Al Gore won the Catholic vote, just as he did the popular vote nationwide. In 2004, Catholics are evenly divided in support for President George Bush and Senator John Kerry.

    Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on June 20, 2008 at 2026 hrs
    
    
    

13. I guess I’m too old.

    I’m old enough to remember when Catholics wouldn’t dream of voting GOP.

    I’m also old enough to remember when we didn’t have what I call the GAGG factor thrust at us by the right-wing.

    G-D, ABORTION, GUNS, GAYS.

    I’m so old, I gues I’m gonna shut up, but hey, say ‘Hi’ for me when you get to Appleton to visit your friends at the JBS.

    This country would be so much better off with JBS and their ilk running things.

    If the GOP really cared about abortion, then why did’t they do something about between 2001-2007 when they controlled everthing: The White House, the Congress, the Supreme Court?

    Answer: Because they know what would have happened if they outlawed abortion.

    It’s the same thing if the Dems somehow outlawed guns, which of course, they never will, despite the best attempts by the GOP/NRA to have voters believe otherwise. The Dems would be creamed if they did such a thing.

    The GOP doesn’t care about abortion, one way or the other. They care about hate and fearmongering.

    Bye!

    Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on June 20, 2008 at 2052 hrs
    
    
    

Commenting is not available in this channel entry.