Stanek weekend question II: Should photo of teen mom holding son be banned from yearbook?
Click photo to enlarge. Also take the poll at end of this post.
From NYDailyNews.com, May 3:
A North Carolina high school banned a student mom from holding her baby son in her yearbook photo over fears it would promote teen pregnancy.
Teachers at Wheatmore High School said a picture of Caitlin Tiller, 17, holding 1-year-old son Leland would sent the wrong message to other pupils.
And so they refused to print the picture in the yearbook.
This was despite the fact that staff asked students to bring along items to help make their photos more personal.
Tiller, who gave birth to Leland in April of her junior year, thought he would be the perfect prop.
She said he inspired her to graduate early to then go on to college — and that she was proud of her decision to have him and continue her studies.
“He helped me get to where I am today. I wouldn’t be the person I am today without him,” she told WGHP.
But last month she was told the picture had been removed from the book. And so Tiller said she would rather her space run blank than have a photo without her son.
“She took responsibility. They should be proud students are willing to stay in school graduate and make something of themselves and not try and hide it,” her mom Karen Morgan said.
Your thoughts?
Jill Stanek is a nurse turned speaker, columnist and blogger, a national figure in the effort to protect both preborn and postborn innocent human life.
It’s the students’ yearbook, and they all know who she is and her situation already. I think it’s a moot issue.
This is a tough one. Will it encourage teen pregnancy? No more than the public school classes/specials that not only teach teens how to have sex, but encourage them to explore.
If they truly want to send a message to hopefully reduce teen pregnancy, they should post the aborted babies from their school.
I am thankful this young mom did not abort her baby. I am thankful she is encouraged to finish school. I hope she will be encouraged to marry a Godly man soon and to seek God to give this child a stable home, home educate to stop the continual downward spiral of public education’s upside down morality.
I voted yes. This is reminding me a bit of the “do infants and small children belong at Mass” issue that Catholics debate sometimes. Being prolife doesn’t mean unqualified support for every parenting situation. Being prolife doesn’t mean that it’s a good idea to bring toddlers everywhere. One can be prolife and have a bit of common sense. Yes, I’m prolife. No, I don’t think it’s healthy for girls, babies, or the culture at large to give young women (young men seem to have enough sense to know this) the impression that having and keeping a baby as a single girl in high school is an okay or even neutral thing to do. It isn’t. And no, Mum, the school should not be “proud” that someone didn’t drop out. Everyone is SUPPOSED to stay in school and graduate. It’s not inconsistent to be prolife and expect others to behave responsibly and to recognize that single motherhood is not healthy for individuals or the culture.
She should mail a properly sized photo to all the students in the school so that they can insert the photo themselves into the blank space if they want to.
Joanne, it’s attitudes like that that discourage teen girls from giving birth and drive them into hiding their pregnancy and other desperate acts. I hope you’re not suggesting that she should’ve been forced to give her child up for adoption–I don’t think the baby scoop era is something that should ever be repeated. And being forced to marry the father would be equally bad–the couple ends up resenting one another and then usually taking out the resentment on the baby. It’s all very well to say’she shouldn’t have been having sex in the first place’, but it’s kind of pointless once the act is already done.
I personally don’t see a problem with the picture. Our yearbook was strictly head and shoulder shots, but providing the school allows for full-body shots, I really don’t see what the issue is. She took on a difficult task and she finished school while parenting a baby. I think she should be proud of herself.
I read elsewhere that there was a separate section of the yearbook where you could have a picture yourself with other family members displayed. It is a yearbook and NOT a family album so I don’t think “encouraging teen pregnancy” should be a factor. A child is NOT a “prop” , so I don’t buy that line of reasoning. Basically, the young lady doesn’t like the rules and wants to be an “exception” for no particular reason than she had a child during her high school years; so I voted “No”. (:>)
Decisions made in fear never work out very well.
She is a proud mother. She knows it. Her classmates know it.
Print the photo.
It’s not like the kids don’t already know she has a baby. I don’t see what difference it makes.
Probably won’t encourage teenage pregnancy – just as likely to discourage, by showing concrete consequences most will not want. BUT if it encourages one teenager who has, through whatever sin or mischance fallen pregnant, to take responsibility for the huge responsibility she’s been stuck with, and to embrace the great gift she’s been offered, then hallelujah! Print that pic!
“Promote teen pregnancy.” Is the problem TEEN pregnancy? Or is it UNMARRIED pregnancy?
It wasn’t too long ago that people tended to be married by 18. They frequently had babies before 20. No scandal was attached to being a married teen mom.
Chaperoned dating?
More adult supervision?
Perhaps even more germane, we need to make it economically feasible for people to marry young and get their lives really started. College and grad school these days have perpetuated adolescence until the average person is about 30.
If people wed young and were financially stable young, you might see a very welcome reduction in abortions!!!!!!!!
Jennifer, of course no one should be forced to give up his or her child. But what should my “attitude” be? I’m supposed to pretend that it’s a healthy situation for children to have a single, teenaged mother? That kids don’t deserve to have two parents who are married to each other? Do you think it’s been a positive thing for the African American community to have such a huge percentage of children born out of wedlock? If you would answer yes to any of those questions, I’d say your beliefs require more defending than mine.
One of the reasons I support the traditional definition of marriage is that part of embracing a redefinition of marriage, eg, same sex marriage, is supporting the idea that kids don’t need one parent or the other. That’s a lie. Children need and deserve both parents. Where did we all get the idea that children don’t need both parents? I’d say from the cultural acceptance of illegitimacy. We’re not all autonomous units. We live in a culture and we’re affected by the decisions that other people make, especially around reproduction. Again, being prolife does not mean unqualified support for every parenting and family situation.
I think it depends a little on why she is single teen mother. Did her boyfriend leave her or did she plan to be a single mother.
However, even if she is a single mother on purpose I still think the school should publish the photo. It gives everyone a chance to talk about the issue in a mature and sensible way – the pros and cons of teen pregnancy, single parenting, and abortion. The school should celebrate her choice for life, her responsible attitude in completing her education, and her wish to be a good mother. These are all positives. Teen pregnancy is not bad in and of itself. It has to do with how the teens handle the pregnancy. The school and society should not promote teen pregnancy but society should not be embarrassed by teen pregnancy and the mothers who choose life either. Choosing life in this situation is what we want, when a mother does go through with the pregnancy we should not shun or alienate her in any way whatsoever. The hard part is the yearbook typically is received by all the students so there would be younger kids getting the book – this reason would make me want to vote “Yes.”
In my opinion, by not publishing the photo the school can be seen as effectively saying that she should’ve aborted the child. So although I see the reasons want to prohibit the picture I think prohibiting the picture would not be very wise for the reason just stated - it would be short-sighted in my opinion and may cause more teens to abort. I would vote “No” but I didn’t vote at all because I don’t think her desire to have her child in the yearbook shows pride.
Yet, if the school explains to the teenager why they are refusing the picture I don’t think the mother would be offended or feel less supported by the school community. Whatever the school chooses in this situation they need to communicate their reasoning to the public and students as well - now that everyone knows about it. I wouldn’t like it if a pregnant teen Mom chooses to abort because of the removal of the photo.
Again, being prolife does not mean unqualified support for every parenting and family situation.
Joanna, what does this mean exactly? I know you are aware that there are a lot of different reasons for “single” parenting. Yes, there is the common reason of irresponsibility but there are often reasons for single parenting such as abandonment, abuse, and even death.
Joanna, by the way, I like your posts and I think they are very reasonable.
@ Tyler: Is the problem teen pregnancy or unmarried pregnancy?
I believe it is the latter.
We do not condemn her or judge her for being a young, single mother. A little after the fact right? Little late to be having “the sex talk” isn’t it??
We are not promoting teen sex by supporting this young lady and her precious boy!! I thought we as prolifers offered help and hope and love and support to young mothers so they feel EMPOWERED to finish school, get a job, raise their children.
Maybe not an ideal parenting situation but she could have aborted and we would know nothing about it.
She wanted to raise her son. Not put him up for adoption! We support her in that.
I agree, that a child is not a prop. However, this photo is about a personal journey in highschool. This is one girl’s journey. I think it should be printed on that basis alone. Were there a transgender or homosexual photo with something offensive to some people in it, the outcry would be so loud, the school would concede to print the photo, even if it were obscene.
I don’t think that the photo has so much power that the other kids will think they should go out and get pregnant so they can have a photo like that any more than a person pictured in a cast would make people want to go break a leg. It’s just a step in healing the hurt caused by sin. It’s a testimony to others to be over comers without stepping on other tiny humans to get there.
At first I thought it wasn’t appropriate and would stand out on the page. Then the point that EVERYONE was invited to bring something to enhance their photo convinced me that it was an appropriate choice.
No – shouldn’t be banned. She is a mom, and we (as a society) should embrace and support her wherever possible.
I agree w x gop for once. She’s a mom. Let her hold the baby.
Although I was 22 when I became pregnant out of wedlock, I well remember the stigma of being unmarried and the pressure to abort.
I am very proud of this young woman for standing her ground and for her own mother for supporting her. It’s too bad that she does not have the support of the school community behind her (which I believe is the reflection of her wider community).
Let’s dig into the backgrounds of the teachers who think this photo promotes teenage pregnancy. How many of them had sex before marriage or had abortions (or coerced abortions)? They were okay with photos of students holding their instruments, sports equipment and pets but holding a baby is taboo? Maybe mom will choose not to enroll her child in this school in a few years?
I wonder what their sex ed program looks like. Was Planned Parenthood ever allowed in during Caitlin’s school years? Maybe they should require another year of sex ed for their students. If the health teacher is a pro-choicer, they should have put the photo of Caitlin and her baby right next to his/her photo.
I’m thinking a lot of schools are going to take this as an opportunity to not allow anything but the senior in the photo but since this rule wasn’t in place, I think staff members should take a good long look in the mirror.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aOZPBUu7Fro
Ohmygosh! I agree with Ex-GOP, too!
I’m sorry for ever arguing with him. Almost. ;)
Carla, I agree that the school shouldn’t condemn her. How do you think the school should convey the information that raising children is best done in the context of marriage? What about the younger kids in the high school who may take the inclusion of the photo as an endorsement of teen pregnancy. I see this situation a little differently from the employee who got sacked for having pre-marital sex because that woman was an adult. This is a little different because in this high school situation we are dealing with kids.
Since adoption has been mentioned, I would like to point out that some people have suggested a kind of “legal guardianship” as an alternative. The young, financially insolvent mother AND the baby are BOTH taken into the homes of affluent childless couples.
Prax me too!!
Is ex softening? So happy to actually hear him standing up for a mom! Whoot whoot!
In addition to embracing and supporting the mom who it seems it taking responsibility for her actions, we should also embrace and support the father. If he is not stepping up to the plate on his own, I hope he is being held accountable by the mom, her family and the law. Holding people accountable is a form of support.
I can’t imagine why a North Carolina high school would find this picture terribly controversial. A fat teen mother wearing flip-flops has to be one of the more common sights in the American South.
I am in high school right now and I think this is being very over-thought. If I saw this in the year book I would not think “wow, I want to be a mom at 18”, my thought process would be more like “cute shoes, pretty baby” then turn the page and never think of it again. If I were seeing this every single day, and all the girls around me where having babies, then that might affect my choices. I think they should have told her no before the picture, rather than leaving it blank.
If joan isn’t reason enough to make a hardcore proabort become prolife, they will never become prolife.
joan is yet another piece of the puzzle in the War on Women.
joan, what was the sex education program like in this school?
Joans misery comes out every time she posts. I’m the mother of 4 and I can still rock a bikini! So if were talking about pregnancy making you fat then that’s just silly. She can lose the weight but can joan ever lose her dark ugly hard heart?
Joan, I just. love. you.
Maybe she’s comfortable being on the larger side. Plenty of women are. I can’t see her picture . Maybe her weight isn’t her first priority. Unlike some selfish pro aborts who only care about weight and looks. You see it plenty in Hollywood. Halle Berry Jillian Barbari Madonna Demi Cher got their bodies back after pregnancy. Sheesh.
Joan likened childbirth to taking a dump. I assure you Miss Potty mouth it’s a heck of a lot harder than that! Real women give birth and it’s hard work. A dump? I wish it were that painless.
That’s like saying passing a kidney stone is like taking a pee.
Okay I’ve just looked at the picture. Joan made it sound like she was dressed like a joke. The picture is tasteful and she looks cute to me. She’s holding a new born so if you want to mock her weight it’s called post pregnancy weight. Took me 2 years to lose it after baby 4.
It’s so funny the argument against this being in the yearbook is that it will encourage teen pregnancy. Um, sorry, teen pregnancy will happen, especially with the availability of contraceptives and “sex education”. Their real fear is that this will encourage teen birth. Because teen moms taking responsibility for their actions, raising children, and having challenges is a bad thing…
Just goes to show you the girl didn’t flunk out of high school and give up. You know to be a fat slob of a welfare mom. Sarcasm of course. She got that diploma. She could have killed her baby and gotten it also. Then joan would be in her corner.
Joan sounds like a teenage boy. Kinda sad.
Hi Jack hope you’re well. I know. Might be so. You never know who is typing on that computer.
And if she is a grown woman then she’s pretty tragic.
Thanks Heather I’m okay. I hope you are doing better lately and handling things well.
I just can’t believe that Joan, who supposedly has given birth to two children of her own, would insult a woman for not being able to lose the baby weight like three months after giving birth. It’s just so childish.
I noticed how the headline at the top of this thread goes along with this story. ”Courageous. Students Abolishing Abortion”. The colors even match Caitlin and Leland’s outfits.
I’ve found that those who judge women on their appearance are the most insecure people. joan needs to learn to love herself. Did you watch the Dove video, joan?
If Caitlin ever comes across this thread I want her to know how beautiful she (and her son) is and that I quit apologizing for the behavior of “ugly” people a long time ago.
It is Caitlin’s generation who will stop abortion.
Joan, I’m pro-choice. And as a Southerner, I see no reason to denigrate and stereotype an entire region and its people. Not to mention attacking a young girl who’s obviously worked very hard to get where she is. And furthermore, I don’t think women should be attacking other women for their body shape, whatever it may be. The American media does that every day, and it does contribute to eating disorders and body image insecurity.
Unless the baby is a student at the high school he/she does not belong in the photo. If this student is allowed to have her baby in her yearbook picture then all students should be able to have what ever family members they choose in their yearbook picture as well. Grandpa and Grandma are family members just like a baby is. People are proud of the grandparents. Whatever the rules are should apply equally. Being a teen mom doesn’t mean you get special treatment or rules, or at least it shouldn’t. I can’t for the life of me figure out how not allowing a student to take a family photo for the school yearbook would encourage girls to abort.
I don’t see why holding a child for a yearbook photo is necessary. And I am Pro Life and I love children. However, high school is about the individual accomplishment. Why can’t the photo be a closeup of just her face and upper body? I thought that’s how they do yearbook photos.
I do think it does send the wrong message that makes teen pregnancy ok. We shouldn’t encourage teens that it’s ok to be pregnant in high school. That stuff can come later in life. It’s just another way for the fabric of what makes us a family be stripped away. I”m sure this girl is a single mom with the father of the child not wanting anything to do with the child ( in most cases).
Right j starr that’s like saying everyone in Detroit dresses ghetto or everyone from the south are hillbillys. My mom lives in TN and she has a lot of class. My cousin from TN is a flight attendant. And yeah Jack she’s just given birth. Sorry she’s not a size 00 yet. Joans comments are obnoxious. Her feeble attempt at humour.
Tenn and S Monty I get what you’re saying, but I think the rules at this school is the kids are allowed to have something important to them in their picture? Correct me if I’m wrong. I don’t see what’s wrong with letting her hold her little baby, he’s obviously important to her, and it does send a lovely message that if you end up making a mistake and getting pregnant, you aren’t going to be ostracized and treated badly, there will be help for you.
I can sorta see others points ….maybe she she should have done the baby photos for her own personal senior pics but good for her just the same. They could have put a face shot in.
Jack, a little baby is not a “thing” but a person and family member. If a baby is a prop or a thing then that certainly undercuts the foundation of the pro-life movement! The school could solve this issue by saying “Students may not have any other person in their yearbook photos.” Comparing an infant to a trumpet, a pet or a car is kind of a silly argument. She an take all the family portraits she wants and most yearbooks have space in the back where family photos and personalized messages can be placed. Let her put her baby picture there.
”
“Jack, a little baby is not a “thing” but a person and family member. If a baby is a prop or a thing then that certainly undercuts the foundation of the pro-life movement!”
I certainly wasn’t trying to call a baby a “thing”, I’m sorry I came across that way if I did. I just thought that the school was allowing the kids to personalize their photos, what would personalize her photo more than having her son with her?
“The school could solve this issue by saying “Students may not have any other person in their yearbook photos.” Comparing an infant to a trumpet, a pet or a car is kind of a silly argument. She an take all the family portraits she wants and most yearbooks have space in the back where family photos and personalized messages can be placed. Let her put her baby picture there.”
I’ve never been to school, I’ve never seen a yearbook, I didn’t know they had a section like that. That would be a nice compromise I think (if they did make that rule, that no other people could be in the picture, then that would be fair). She could make a whole section in the back about her baby, that would also send a good message.
@ Jack: How did you get out of EVER going to school?
“@ Jack: How did you get out of EVER going to school?”
My parents “homeschooled” me (they did a terrible job though lol). I’ve never been to a public school.
I said yes, it should be banned, not because of ‘does it send the wrong message?’, but because it is a yearbook. One person per photo. That’s the way it has always been and that’s the way it should always be. It’s not a family photo book, it’s a school photo book.
“Joanna, what does this mean exactly? I know you are aware that there are a lot of different reasons for “single” parenting.”
Hi, Tyler: There is a woman named Joanna who posts here I believe and her posts are usually good – maybe you are confusing me with her? If you’re saying my posts in this thread are reasonable, then thank you : )
I am “supportive” of women keeping their babies – I’ve donated lots of time and money to prolife causes over the years. That doesn’t mean, however, that I promote the fiction that it doesn’t matter how children are raised. Of course it matters – mostly to them. We can all only speak from our own experience, but I’m extremely grateful that my parents were married to each other. Like every human being, I deserved a married mother and father. I’m sure I would have been grateful for life if my mother had been a single teen. But there is no way my life would have been the same emotionally or most likely financially if my mother had been a single teen. My father wasn’t dispensable and I won’t pretend that he was because I think abortion is wrong.
I’m astounded at people undermining the school’s authority here. Really, no one thinks there could be some very sensible and intelligent reasons for not wanting to seem as though they are celebrating teen motherhood? No one thinks the school is justified in taking this small but very reasonable action in the hopes of deterring other girls from becoming teen moms?
Every culture that I’m aware of has discouraged illegitimacy (to use a non-PC word). While that discouragement was sometimes done in unnecessarily cruel ways, there ARE healthy reasons for trying to minimize the situation, reasons that benefit children first and foremost. People have always known that children don’t do as well when they are raised outside the protective bounds of a married mother and father. Everyone’s defensive of Caitlin. What about her son? He doesn’t deserve the best start in life? Again, this is reminding me of people who promote same sex marriage. It’s about the adults. Children will just have to manage.
Joanne, yes I was referring to your posts.
I wouldn’t say that people are undermining the school’s authority. The school anyway is only able to teach our children at our authority, the parent’s authority, anyway. Moreover, we don’t really know all of the reasons for the school’s decision or what motivated them to prohibit the photo.
Every culture that I’m aware of has discouraged illegitimacy (to use a non-PC word). While that discouragement was sometimes done in unnecessarily cruel ways, there ARE healthy reasons for trying to minimize the situation, reasons that benefit children first and foremost. People have always known that children don’t do as well when they are raised outside the protective bounds of a married mother and father. Everyone’s defensive of Caitlin. What about her son? He doesn’t deserve the best start in life? Again, this is reminding me of people who promote same sex marriage. It’s about the adults. Children will just have to manage.
These are insightful comments. Yes, I guess it possible that the school had legitimate reasons for not wanting the photo in the yearbook and weren’t simply out of fear. Raising concern for her son was/is very appropriate. Today’s culture, including myself, are very reticent to make tough judgment calls – yet we all know there are consequences for any decision. Strangely, promoting traditional marriages and family structure are some of the more difficult institutions to support and justify today. How do we support traditional family without making this young woman and others like her not feel shamed or alienated for being pregnant as a teen. I don’t know if this teen had any choice in becoming pregnant – she could’ve been raped for all I know. If she was raped, it would surely be harder to justify not including the photo in the yearbook. But I guess we should expect to have to make some hard decisions if we want to stand up for marriage.
” Every culture that I’m aware of has discouraged illegitimacy (to use a non-PC word). While that discouragement was sometimes done in unnecessarily cruel ways, there ARE healthy reasons for trying to minimize the situation, reasons that benefit children first and foremost. People have always known that children don’t do as well when they are raised outside the protective bounds of a married mother and father. Everyone’s defensive of Caitlin. What about her son? He doesn’t deserve the best start in life? Again, this is reminding me of people who promote same sex marriage. It’s about the adults. Children will just have to manage.”
Well, married mother and father doesn’t automatically equal good life. There are plenty of horribly abusive or poverty stricken married households, and plenty of children who have a hard time growing up in a married household. Now, it’s statistically more likely that children have good outcomes when their parents are married, but that doesn’t mean that children born into less than ideal circumstances are necessarily going to turn out badly.
About Caitlin’s son… how does stigmatizing his mother help him at all? You can discourage teen pregnancy without stigmatizing teens who make a mistake and get pregnant. And you definitely don’t want this boy to grow up feeling guilty for being born to a single teen mother. It probably would have been better if he had been born to a married couple who wasn’t in high school, that’s true. But he’s here now, and him and his mother deserve help and love, not condemnation.
Joanne, do you think it is possible to try a new way, to try to do both supporting traditional marriage and teen Mothers? I tend to think we can do both.
Well, married mother and father doesn’t automatically equal good life. There are plenty of horribly abusive or poverty stricken married households, and plenty of children who have a hard time growing up in a married household. Now, it’s statistically more likely that children have good outcomes when their parents are married, but that doesn’t mean that children born into less than ideal circumstances are necessarily going to turn out badly.
This is true Jack. Do you still support preparing people for the ideal of a traditional marriage and family?
Interesting how so many think that this picture is inappropriate for the yearbook because it’s a baby that Caitlin holds. If she held a soccer ball or violin or paint brush to personalize her photo and express what she’s passionate about, all well and good. But passionate about her son and being a mom…NO WAY!
The school acted stupidly, IMO.
” This is true Jack. Do you still support preparing people for the ideal of a traditional marriage and family?”
I’m not sure what you mean? What do you mean by preparing people for the ideal of a traditional marriage and family?
“There are plenty of horribly abusive or poverty stricken married households, and plenty of children who have a hard time growing up in a married household.”
lol, yes, I knew someone would come back with this. Again, it’s like the ssm discussion - pointing out the worst case scenarios of marriage and family life in order to make the alternatives seem more reasonable or less bad. Ironic that someone who disagrees with the school should bring up abuse and poverty since a married two parent family is the best insurance policy against abuse and poverty. (This knowledge probably factored into the school’s decision to ban the photo.) And of course some children have a hard time in two parent families. Growing up can be difficult. I can only again speak from my own experiences, but having some emotionally difficult times during my teen years would in no way have been made EASIER by the absence of a dad. I’m sure the opposite would have been true. In fact, I noticed, as everyone else did, that Caitlin is obese, which to me says that she could have some emotional issues. I also notice that her last name is different than that of her mother. I guess I wonder where Caitlin’s own dad is, and if he played any kind of meaningful role in her life. At least from what I have seen in the African American community, it seems to be difficult to end the generational cycle of out of wedlock births. Which is yet another reason to try to minimize them in the first place.
Tyler, I like what you say about “making tough judgments.” People are often accused of “judging” others when what they’re really doing is simply using their judgment.
I’m not sure what you mean? What do you mean by preparing people for the ideal of a traditional marriage and family?
At this point, I simply mean showing support for traditional marriage and family by talking publicly about how traditional marriage and family represent the ideal family structure for children - all the social science is in – this is pretty much just as much a fact as the preborn baby is a baby, yet we no longer tell this to our children or even to our adults. There is a strange silence on this subject and I am not sure why. No one ever mocks or makes it difficult for people to say they support traditional marriage and family.
The school “staff asked students to bring along items to help make their photos more personal.” It did not ask students to bring along family members. Babies are not “items” or things. I would vote “Yes” but not because I agree that it is promoting teen pregnancy. If the student wanted to cradle her grandmother, would that not be a joke?
“lol, yes, I knew someone would come back with this. Again, it’s like the ssm discussion - pointing out the worst case scenarios of marriage and family life in order to make the alternatives seem more reasonable or less bad. Ironic that someone who disagrees with the school should bring up abuse and poverty since a married two parent family is the best insurance policy against abuse and poverty. (This knowledge probably factored into the school’s decision to ban the photo.)”
Well, you don’t even know the exact reasons the school banned the photo, so don’t pretend you do. I bring up abuse and poverty because I’m tired of people pretending it doesn’t exist in “traditional” families. It exists to a lesser extent in married households, but it still is far more common than it should be.
“And of course some children have a hard time in two parent families. Growing up can be difficult. I can only again speak from my own experiences, but having some emotionally difficult times during my teen years would in no way have been made EASIER by the absence of a dad.”
I would have been better off with my dad nowhere near me ever (I grew up in a two parent household, my biological parents are married and still are, been married almost 40 years). We all have our own experiences.
“In fact, I noticed, as everyone else did, that Caitlin is obese, which to me says that she could have some emotional issues. I also notice that her last name is different than that of her mother. I guess I wonder where Caitlin’s own dad is, and if he played any kind of meaningful role in her life. At least from what I have seen in the African American community, it seems to be difficult to end the generational cycle of out of wedlock births. Which is yet another reason to try to minimize them in the first place.”
Caitlin is not obese, ffs. She just gave birth to an infant a few months before this photo was taken. Maybe she’s having trouble getting the baby weight off. I have no idea what she looks like when she hadn’t just given birth, so I’m not going to claim that she has a problem with obesity. That’s just rude. You also don’t know anything about her family structure, you’re simply speculating.
Yeah, single parenthood, along with a lot of other issues, tend to be passed down through the generations. The answer isn’t to shame or stigmatize single mothers and their children though.
Catlin is not obese. She just bad a baby. My sister in law had multiple abortions and she’s obese morbidly obese!
“I wonder what their sex ed program looks like. Was Planned Parenthood ever allowed in during Caitlin’s school years? Maybe they should require another year of sex ed for their students.”
The high school, according to Wikipedia, is located in one of North Carolina’s most solidly Republican counties. Doubtful there’s any PP “infiltration” within 100 miles of the school. No, this is just old-fashioned morality policing by the “family values” set.
I believe Debbie is morbidly obese from emotional problems from her abortions
If people think this is something that PP would or could do, then most likely it is wrong to have prohibited the picture.
Individuals differ a lot in weight. We can’t know whether or not Caitlan’s weight is related to her recent pregnancy.
Everyone is focusing on TEEN pregnancy. The problem is unmarried young women having babies that would usually be better off born within a HAPPY, STABLE, FINANCIALLY SOLVENT marriage.
Which is preferable: A 19-year-old married woman having a baby or a 20-year-old single woman having a baby?
Jack, I know you weren’t saying that babies were things! I just find it ironic that people would compare holding an infant to holding a soccer ball or other object so this mother can get special treatment. I’m pro-choice and even I know a three month infant is not an object or a prop. Either this student thinks she is above the rules or she needs some parenting classes badly to learn babies are not props. Her picture with the baby looks perfectly nice and the school was kind enough to go ahead and do a family portrait for her and nobody else. She can select another picture without her son for the yearbook. Mostly though, I think this is a mountain out of molehill and if this young lady is one raising the fuss over the matter she needs to focus her energy on her baby, getting a job, finishing school and becoming self-supporting.
I agree that a baby is not an item or a prop. Would school authority have supported Caitlin having her photo taken with the baby’s crib or infant seat? What about you Tenn, would you have supported that?
Does the school employ any one who had sex as a teen, had a child out of wedlock, is divorced, or is heavyset? If so, by some mindsets here, they are promoting teen sex, teen pregnancy, divorce and obesity.
The photo shoot took place in the school cafeteria a full year before Caitlin was told the photo was not going to be allowed. There were many people who knew she had her photo taken with her baby. This article states the principal said it was the yearbook advisor’s decision: http://shine.yahoo.com/parenting/teen-mom-and-son-banned-from-yearbook-photo-170243046.html.
The school could have let the photo go this year and put in some stricter guidelines for next year. As it is, they have helped the prolife movement. Notice how proaborts HATE when prolifers come out in defense of young, single moms and their children? You know because we don’t care about people after they are born and all.
Question “Authority.”
The high school, according to Wikipedia, is located in one of North Carolina’s most solidly Republican counties. Doubtful there’s any PP “infiltration” within 100 miles of the school. No, this is just old-fashioned morality policing by the “family values” set.
Wouldn’t it be interesting to find out how many teens became pregnant (including those who aborted) is this most solidly Republican county vs. how many teens became pregnant (including those who aborted) in a same-sized solidly Democrat county infiltrated by PP?
We’d never get the truth though because we all know how abortions are covered up and lied about. It’s much harder to cover up the babies once they are born.
Notice how proaborts HATE when prolifers come out in defense of young, single moms and their children?
My sincere apologies to Jennifer Starr for my statement above (and other proaborts who defend/help moms and babies in difficult situations). I hadn’t read all the comments here and Jennifer did defend the hate directed towards Caitlin.
Blue Velvet,
I’ve dealt with enough teen pregnancy to assure you that its a far more complex issue than dispensing birth control pills and sex ed classes. You have no idea the number of girls I have tried to talk out of becoming pregnant. Yes you read that right.
Decades of PP and millions of tax dollars have done nothing to solve the problem so that should tell even you something. Oh yes, there’s the tired excuse the problem would be so much worse if not for PP. That’s like a police chief telling a crime ridden community he’s doing a great job because the crime problem would be a lot worse without him.
@Jack..for someone who didn’t go to public schools you’re quite bright. I wouldn’t say your parents did a bad job. @Mary….I have met teen girls who were in abusive relationships and I have also tried to talk them out of getting pregnant. But one such girl announced to me 4 months ago that she was indeed pregnant. Many women get themselves into this position th keep the man. I’m not kidding . I’m happy to say this girl is not aborting but she’s working as a stripper and the man is still abusive. Proof that with 2 PP in the local neighborhood teen pregnancy will continue.
The high school, according to Wikipedia, is located in one of North Carolina’s most solidly Republican counties. Doubtful there’s any PP “infiltration” within 100 miles of the school. No, this is just old-fashioned morality policing by the “family values” set
There are nine planned parenthoods in NC. Only four offer abortion derives, but the rest refer women to the ones that do provide it. The closest one to her school is only an hour away and it offers abortion serves and its less than100 miles.
“Decades of PP and millions of tax dollars have done nothing to solve the problem”
It’s important to keep pointing out the *positive* correlation between the widespread availability (and taxpayer funding) of bc and the dramatic increase in out of wedlock births and abortions. I realize that, as we’re constantly told, “correlation does not equal causation,” which is true, but as you say – what we’ve done so far has not seemed to ameliorate the problem.
“Caitlin is not obese, ffs.”
This statement is obviously not true, but more importantly, “ffs”? Are you serious? And you’re calling me “rude”? Right. Thanks for the discussion.
“I’m happy to say this girl is not aborting but she’s working as a stripper and the man is still abusive”
Heather, what part of the country are you in, if you don’t mind me asking? There are lots of ministries now that help women leave the sex industry. Someone might be able to help this woman.
I do not want babies being killed on my tax dollars nor do I think I should have to pay for anyone’s birth control. If PP is performing multiple abortions on women this builds up a hefty $$$$$. Also many women I know have had multiple abortions on Medicaid. In Ohio abortion can cost over 1000$ if a woman chooses versed and then the antibiotics and birth control after the procedure .And yes women have multiples and they aren’t paying for it. The tax payers have to. My mom brotber and myself don’t want to pay for anyone’s abortion . I am against murder of preborn.
I live in Ohio but I have already told this gal she could come and stay with me and I could get her help. She rejected that as she wants to be with this man.
Question. Why do we keep taking about her weight? What kind of people are faced with a real issue and instead decide to comment\mock on her weight? Like seriously, let’s all just grow up.
And the girl has no family support. She is white and the father is black. I didn’t pry but her family has nothing to do with her.
Kelsey I agree. People are being cruel saying she’s obese . She’s not. Joan started that ball rolling and I came to the girls defense. If she wants to drop the weight then so be it. If not let her alone . She looks happy to me. Maybe she doesn’t want to be a twig.
Joan called her FAT! Shame on her. I want to see a picture of joan and her perfect body.
Joan is a bully for making such a statement but would this liberal bully a homosexual?
Heather, I see. That’s too bad about this woman’s situation.
Kelsey, I think Joan was the only one here “mocking” Caitlin’s weight. If you’re telling her to grow up, fine. I commented on Caitlin’s weight after others brought it up because I think that and the fact that her last name is different than her mother’s probably indicates some overall unhealthy circumstances in this girl’s life. Some of the comments under the story in the NY Daily News relating to Caitlin’s weight are pretty mean. Not ALL discussion related to weight is cruel and inappropriate.
Being a bully can cause suicide. One thing I don’t like is when libs like Ellen always want to exclude it to homosexuality and bullies. How about extending that to stop bullying ANYONE?? Mocking someones weight and looks is bullying and because of it Mentor High school had a chain of copycat suicides. Just stop it all in general. And none of these kids were gay. One girl was called a slut every day and hung herself. The bullies showed up at the girls wake laughing and saying she even looks like a slut in ber casket . They were laughing saying she looks terrible . Don’t believe me? Look up Mentor High school suicides
Yes Prax, I would have no problem at all with her using her baby’s crib, blankets or other articles. It would look a bit odd but she is being held to the same standard as other students. It is not about ostracizing or pretending she doesn’t have a baby, it is about being fair to all students.
You’re fine, Praxades :) Actually, Caitlin’s story reminds me of a friend of mine, a single mother of the two most amazing children in the world (okay,so I’m biased). She was working two jobs and putting herself through nursing school and I helped her out by watching her kids for whatever she could afford to pay me, picking them up from school, feeding them dinner, making sure they did their homework and putting them to bed–basically whatever I could do to help until she graduated. She’s now an RN working for a hospital in another state, and while I miss them like crazy I’m so happy that she and her kids are doing well and I’m extremely proud of her. And I know this girl can do the same.
Hi Heather 10:00am
Good point. I’d also like to see the bevy of beauties who are so quick to point out the imperfections of others.
I remember one ardent feminist I know, a real feminazi, who said she didn’t believe Paula Jones because she was “homely”. I don’t like to be catty, let’s just say this woman was in no position to suggest that Jones’ physical appearance made her unworthy of belief. Also, such a comment from so ardent a feminist struck me as very ironic.
Yes Prax, I would have no problem at all with her using her baby’s crib, blankets or other articles.
Then she should have been told at the photo shoot. It was, after all, held in the school cafeteria, for crying out loud. If someone from yearbook or administration wasn’t there, they should have been. I have a hard time believing word didn’t get back to administration or school board members who should have let her know immediately. IMO they should have let it go this time and the principal shouldn’t blamed a yearbook adviser. Some leader.
It would look a bit odd but she is being held to the same standard as other students.
Aborted babies look a bit odd too and you would have been okay with her choosing that route.
“I’ve dealt with enough teen pregnancy to assure you that its a far more complex issue than dispensing birth control pills and sex ed classes.”
Well, obviously. But that’s not the point I was trying to make, which was a response to Praxedes’ claim that pro-choice school staff had tried to censor this image. You guys sure love to move the goalposts.
“Decades of PP and millions of tax dollars have done nothing to solve the problem so that should tell even you something.”
It doesn’t tell me anything, because the assertion is just false. You might be curious to know that President Nixon first authorized Title X, the federal funding stream that provides money to Planned Parenthood. The program has been rigorously evaluated, and the data consistently shows that low-cost, easy access family planning resources help women to avert unwanted pregnancies. Of course it’s not the “magic bullet” to ending teen pregnancy — only you guys are claiming that it should be.
http://www.iom.edu/Reports/2009/A-Review-of-the-HHS-Family-Planning-Program-Mission-Management-and-Measurement-of-Results.aspx
Blue Velvet,
Nixon was president until 1974. That’s a few decades back.
Also, my point is that PP has done nothing to solve the problem of teen pregnancy, only to claim the problem would be worse without them.
Nixon signed Title X in 1970. Roe v Wade was in 1973. If low cost family planning works so well, why have we had about 50 millions abortions since Roe v Wade?
If it was Ashley Judd, there would be a half dozen people climbing over each other to insult her looks.
Just saying.
I think that and the fact that her last name is different than her mother’s probably indicates some overall unhealthy circumstances in this girl’s life.
I don’t think anyone here is saying having sex before marriage and being overweight is healthy, overall. To be fair to all students, maybe we ban all students who are 30 percent overweight or 30% underweight (which is more unhealthy) from the yearbook or kids from single-parent homes. Wouldn’t want to send the wrong message.
I have kept my maiden name through two marriages as have many women in happy, healthy marriages. We don’t know the circumstances of Caitlin’s upbringing but if her mom is single, widowed, or divorced, what does that matter? If her parent(s) are abusive, alcoholic, bipolar, unemployed, homosexual and/or anorexic what’s it to you? Maybe her family is the picture-perfect Leave it to Beaver type. Do you normally judge a person by who their family is? If so, we might as well empty most yearbooks of all students.
It’s not inconsistent to be prolife and expect others to behave responsibly and to recognize that single motherhood is not healthy for individuals or the culture.
You’re right. But is also not healthy for a family or community to kick others when they are down either. As others have said, what is done is done and there is no going back.
This is reminding me a bit of the “do infants and small children belong at Mass” issue that Catholics debate sometimes.
Do you believe they don’t belong at Mass? I’ve never heard this debate among Catholics. From my experience, many churches have cry rooms and the majority of parents immediately take them out if they get loud. I doubt it would be a loving attempt to get adults to go to Mass if you tell them to leave the kiddies at home.
Are you Catholic, Joanne? How old are you?
But that’s not the point I was trying to make, which was a response to Praxedes’ claim that pro-choice school staff had tried to censor this image.
I did not claim this. I know nothing of this school or their staff. I was only wondering. You said it is a Republican area. I have done no research on the school. Talk about moving goal posts.
Do you think the photo of her and her baby should have been allowed, BV?
because she is dumb as a rock
And the War on Women continues. . . .
Post-abortive much?
“Also, my point is that PP has done nothing to solve the problem of teen pregnancy, only to claim the problem would be worse without them.”
Right. That’s typically how we evaluate things, Mary, because it’s very rare for one law or program to fix a systemic problem.
Replace “PP” with “seatbelt laws” and “teen pregnancy” with “automobile-related deaths, and you have:
“Oh, seatbelts have done nothing to solve the problem of automobile-related deaths, only to claim the problem would be worse without them.”
Hi ex okay i apologize to Miss Judd but I still find her ugly on the inside insulting Palin and pimping PP.
Hi Mary I remember all of the people ripping on Paula Jones because they couldn’t believe Bill would hit on a woman with such a large nose. Jones had a nose job later and I believe she posed for Penthouse. Anyway I had a good male friend who was rather blunt and remarked “Wow the president could have his pick and yet every woman he’s been with is an ugly dog.”
Blue Velvet,
Not necessarily. As I pointed out, could the police chief simply tell a crime ridden community they would be worse off without him or would the residents expect to safely walk the streets?
Also BV, do a little research on seat belts. They do reduce serious crash related injuries and death by 50%, but there’s one catch. You have to use them. Like birth control, it just won’t work unless its used.
http://www.cdc.gov/Motorvehiclesafety/seatbelts/facts.html
“Do you think the photo of her and her baby should have been allowed, BV?”
Yes. Presumably Caitlin hasn’t had time to twirl a baton or practice her chords much lately, which is probably the same case for the kid who has to work nights at the gas station to support his family. It’s a little cruel, and, frankly, very classist, to cut out the photograph as if she hasn’t accomplished anything meaningful in the past year.
This is a classic example of conservative doublethink. Pretend that sex doesn’t happen if we don’t talk about it. Pretend the baby doesn’t exist.
BTW my pal who made that comment about Jones was a liberal but we were still friends as well as neighbors he passed away a few years ago from a heart attack.
Hi Mary,
What’s your point? That young women have too much access to birth control, or not enough? That they use it too much, or not enough? And “reducing fatalities by 50%” is hardly “solving the problem.” Talking with you is like smashing my head against the wall.
My last word on the matter: the police chief would be justified in claiming that crime would be worse off without him if careful statistical analysis showed that, when adjusted for all the usual co-founding factors like demographic shifts, rates of crime had decreased during his tenure. That’s the standard of analysis applied to Title X programs, and low and behold, they’ve shown to be effective in helping to reduce the rate of unintended pregnancy.
http://www.hhs.gov/opa/title-x-family-planning/research-and-data/title-x-program-assessment/
Hi Heather 1:18PM
As much as I love and respect my big brother, nothing infuriates me like his comment that he “understands” Bill Clinton’s tomcatting, being he is married to Hillary. Excuse me big brother, but Bill’s no prize either, and maybe his serial tomcatting is what has turned Hillary “cold”. Perish the thought a man ever be held responsible for anything!
I totally lost all respect for evangelist Billy Graham when even he made excuses for Clinton’s behavior. You don’t expect that from a man of his stature.
Mary – I think we should refer to her by her proper name – Future President Hillary Clinton.
thanks,
BV,
My point is obvious, if low cost family planning services really make such a difference, then we shouldn’t have had 50 million abortions after Title X went into effect, right?
Sure the police chief could use that argument, but I’m sure a community that lives in constant fear of crime and lives behind triple locked doors would be inclined to tell the chief of police to take his statistics and shove them.
EGV,
So now you’re a prophet?
There are tons of forms of bc out there. The pill IUD spermicide depo provera the sponge female and male condoms…..also sterilization There was Norplant and now plan B. If you’re gonna have sex and you can’t control yourself please figure out how to use SOMETHING !!! Abortion is avoidable. Sadly but most women use nothing and the clinic IS their birth control !!!!
Hillary will never be president. Lol Mary right! Bill was no prize with those giant bags under his eyes. And yes I’ve heard a lot of people remark that Bills wife and pack of girlfriends were all ugly . Sorry can’t control what others say.
BV,
Reducing fatalities by 50% is great, but how much more would they be reduced if everyone used seat belts? So we still have the fatalities and injuries because people don’t bother. Obviously we aren’t solving the problem, are we?
Even if “unplanned” pregnancies are reduced, we’ve still had 50 million abortions since RvW. Obviously we aren’t solving the problem, are we?
I remember the rant on Linda Tripp. The woman went out and had her entire face rearranged
I think just because Bill was the president people thought he ought to be with the cream of the crop type .
Hi Heather,
I always admired Elizabeth Taylor’s earthy style. She was at a formal dinner and told Bill Clinton to quit oogling Sophia Loren’s breasts, which were on display in a low cut dress.
BC: Yuk Yuk Yuk, I wasn’t oogling them
ET: Bullsh**
Mary…did she? Omg lol!!!!
Yeah, Ex-GOP, you don’t understand proper naming conventions.
Hillary Clinton should not be President, especially if she remains married to Slick Willie. Wouldn’t you just gag on calling that promiscuous sexual harasser our “First Gentleman”?
YUCK!!!!
“Even if ‘unplanned’ pregnancies are reduced, we’ve still had 50 million abortions since RvW. Obviously we aren’t solving the problem, are we?”
You could be disingenuous and trot out the cumulative number of abortions as evidence that “things aren’t working,” or you could be honest and look at the rates, year by year, in which case you’d see that the rates of abortion have decreased significantly since the early eighties.
I kinda like Hilary.
” Yes. Presumably Caitlin hasn’t had time to twirl a baton or practice her chords much lately, which is probably the same case for the kid who has to work nights at the gas station to support his family. It’s a little cruel, and, frankly, very classist, to cut out the photograph as if she hasn’t accomplished anything meaningful in the past year.
This is a classic example of conservative doublethink. Pretend that sex doesn’t happen if we don’t talk about it. Pretend the baby doesn’t exist.”
Yes. It’s like people who disown their gay kids and the like. If you can’t see it, it’s not happening.
Great post Denise. She will never be president. Anyway regarding the snarky remarks about Clinton and his choice of females that came from liberals and conservatives alike. You pay a price being in the public eye. Can’t handle it? Leave!!!
“Hillary Clinton should not be President, especially if she remains married to Slick Willie.”
That and anyone who’s pro-choice is automatically unqualified to be President as far as I’m concerned.
” That and anyone who’s pro-choice is automatically unqualified to be President as far as I’m concerned. ”
… You’re so un-American JDC. If you don’t like our freedom of speech why don’t you just move to Canada or something???
This is a classic example of conservative doublethink. Pretend that sex doesn’t happen if we don’t talk about it. Pretend the baby doesn’t exist.
LOL. The libs believe in hiding the child to the point of death! On one hand they scream that abortion is a private medical decision between mother and abortionist. On the other hand, they claim women should be proud of aborting their offspring. They destroy pics of aborted children claiming it is infringing on their rights to not be triggered. Look at the results at the poll at top. I think it’s safe to assume that the majority of the voters are prolife.
I agree that at one point, conservative believed in sending the mother away to have the baby and give it up for adoption. Then the libs came along with the great idea of no longer hiding the mother, but of killing the child to shame the mother. Oh, we sure have come along way, baby.
If you still believe conservatives are denying the problem, it is you who is living in the 50s. My ex-mother-in-law pressured me to “get married right away and no one will even know” once she realized I wouldn’t abort and she is a staunch liberal. And this was in 1990.
Although I was pressured to abort when I became pregnant before marriage by libs, no conservative pressured me to go into hiding to have the baby. I was welcomed in church, by some at work and a big group of high school friends had a baby shower for me and another unwed mother of my age.
When I saw signs of computer porn abuse in my home, the teen involved was lovingly but firmly confronted and guided towards better choices by myself, my husband and his confessor. Many conservative parents lovingly confront their children in similar ways when they see signs of other poor sexual choices. Not all conservatives are in denial about the influence of the larger liberal culture. The liberals are more likely to embrace, flaunt and rationalize abnormal sexual behaviors and desires.
I don’t like Hillary’s political policies ….that’s why she would never vet my vote. Some people asked me if I was anti Obama. because he was black? I assured them race had nothing to do with it. Its where they both stand on abortion.
Hi Denise, 2:14PM
I think he could more accurately be called “First Flasher”.
Come on BV,
Its your side whose “goal” it is to make abortion “legal and rare”. Well. I would think after 43 years of Title X, abortion should indeed be rare.
” When I saw signs of computer porn abuse in my home, the teen involved was lovingly but firmly confronted and guided towards better choices by myself, my husband and his confessor. Many conservative parents lovingly confront their children in similar ways when they see signs of other poor sexual choices. Not all conservatives are in denial about the influence of the larger liberal culture. The liberals are more likely to embrace, flaunt and rationalize abnormal sexual behaviors and desires. ”
Yeah, I do know that some conservative parents are good about being open and honest and loving about stuff like this. My ex’s parents are pretty good about that, and their openness and honesty about sexual matters helped my ex remain a virgin until we got married (she had other problems, but I don’t think they can be blamed for most of them). But on the other hand some parents seem to think that if they just tell the kids it’s “bad” and condemn them, that the problems will go away. I’ve met several like this and I don’t think it’s a very good idea. It doesn’t teach them much, it just seems to hide the issues.
Again if you want to make abortion rare then why? Could it be because the death toll is rising along with abusive and crazy abortionists? If abortion isn’t murder then why doesn’t every pregnant woman just have one? It’s only tissue right. The pc side is looking worse every day.
It’s never okay to tell a child they are “bad” or to condemn them. Pointing out that poor choices and behaviors are not in the best interest of themselves, their family/friends or their community is loving them.
Sometimes good comes out of our poor choices. Like Leland. Babies are never bad.
God is indeed loving and merciful.
” Sometimes good comes out of our poor choices. Like Leland. Babies are never bad.”
That’s part of the reason I think it’s wrong to ban this photo. It’s not his fault he wasn’t conceived in ideal circumstances (and btw not very many people are conceived in completely ideal circumstances), and banning a photo with him in it seems like it’s saying there is something wrong with him, like it’s wrong that he exists. It’s not fair to blame children because their parents made a poor choice.
And I don’t think Caitlin deserves to be condemned either. She seems like she’s working hard to provide a good life for her son, she should be helped and lauded.
Mary you’re killing me today…first flasher roflol
I have to correct my above post. Now had joan said. ” Typical San Francisco. All homos walking around in flip flops and shorts holding hands.” I don’t think that would go over too well in the gay community. Might earn you a butt whuppin. But the correction I wanted to make was about Ellen and her anti bullying message from time to time on her show. How about we don’t bully anyone because they are different? BUT pro aborts get a pass to bully pro lifers kids with DS or other health problems. Bill Maher is a bully to Christians….and on and on. Howard Stern is a bully and exploits women. If its going to stop then it should stop for everyone!!!
One journalists who I think carries himself with a little class is Anderson Cooper. He is a gay man but hey he covered the Gosnell case.
That Moma’s a rockstar. Already you can tell baby boy is going to one of the most confident Men ever, because his mother is fearlessly proud of him.
It just shows that most schools feel babies are punishments or burdens and not the miracles they actually are.
Here’s a woman showing off her gift from God, and administrators want it shamed, what an atrocity. What phonies they are! And they call themselves educators…
lol…
More like…
More like, oh shoot,
what do they call them in Academia…
That’s right, I remember
: big fat dummies!
After sleeping on this issue. I feel more confident that the right thing to do was to publish the picture while talking about the importance of marriage. A culture of life must welcome new life into the world no matter the circumstances of its arrival, or how much it challenges the ideal moral life. We all fall short at times and when that time comes we all want to be welcomed back into our communities. We need the mercy of God, but we also need mercy from each other. Preach God’s justice, practice God’s mercy (I just thought of this slogan – I hope people like it).
Thank you Tyler. I got up and quietly walked out of church today because the preacher was preaching obedience to God as a form of loving God, and he used a women he had met who had three different babies with three different daddies as an example of some one who was uncharitable towards God. It was quite the affrontry on any pro-lifer who’s ever spent any time in front of an abortuary! Not to mention single mothers; the most valuable resource this country currently has to offer. I wish it was the fairey tale for most women, but remember, this is an exile, geeze try to help a sister out, Brothers in the priesthood, man he was just dogging us. It was outrageous.
Pictures like this one need to be shown more. She is a proud young mother, and there is no problem there. This young woman is already great at what she does. Mother’s do God’s work.
“Its your side whose ‘goal’ it is to make abortion ‘legal and rare’. Well. I would think after 43 years of Title X, abortion should indeed be rare.”
Unfortunately that’s not how evaluation works, picking your own standard and complaining that the program you’re ideologically opposed to isn’t meeting it. It’s just intellectually dishonest. 19 abortions per 1,000 women, per year might seem pretty rare to somebody who isn’t foolish enough to think that abortion as a practice will ever “end.”
Let’s change the topic a bit, though. How ’bout the millions that Congress poured into abstinence-only-until-marriage programs? That was a wild success, right?
I am not sure why the preacher would feel the need to use such specific examples but perhaps in the end he explained why. I agree that an easier and perhaps a more effective way to preach is for Preachers to focus on painting on the ideal moral – describing the virtuous life first. If preachers talked and talked about the virtues again and again that would be helpful and then preachers would need only say: “And do like wise.” They should probably acknowledge in all of their sermons that God is merciful to us when we fall short as well as adding a little message about picking yourself up, the risks of falling short so you don’t do the bad again, and how living the virtuous life will help you merit the reward of Heaven. As St. Paul says: it is Jesus’s salvific acts and faith that redeem us, which we appropriate through faith in Him, and by baptizing ourselves in His name, and then commence with our good works that will help merit us Heaven.
BV,
http://www.abort73.com/abortion_facts/us_abortion_statistics/
City,
I need to acknowledge that I agree with the preacher’s statement obedience to God is the way we show our love to God. Technically, I think it is a truism. Obedience, in my opinion, includes, among other things, being virtuous, being merciful, being just, going to Mass, praying, almsgiving, fasting, not sinning, not breaking the commandments, etc….
I am not sure if what I just said is helpful but I thought I should share it.
…
It just shows that most schools feel babies are punishments or burdens and not the miracles they actually are.
Mother’s do God’s work.
Preach God’s justice, practice God’s mercy.
These.
Babies aren’t miracles. I thought you knew how that works?
‘Mothers do god’s work’ – they create new universes? With plants and animals and stuff?
‘Preach god’s justice, do god’s work’ sounds contradictory.
Now you’re just picking a fight, Reality.
Not really Jack.
Miracles are simply events for which there is inadequate information or knowledge at that time to explain them. We know how babies are reproduced. Therefore no miracle.
I found ‘mothers do god’s work’ to be inexplicable. Exactly what work of god’s do mothers do?
Preaching god’s justice but not following through on it, rather, practicing god’s mercy (it should have been ‘practice’ and ‘mercy’, not ‘do’ and ‘work’ – two typos! my bad) does sound rather contradictory.
Babies aren’t miracles. I thought you knew how that works?
Reality please enlighten us how life originated – even Richard Dawkins acknowledges that we still don’t know how life originated on earth (and therefore in the universe). Evolution only explains how life evolved…not how it originated.
I didn’t say I agreed with the statements, it just looked like you were picking a fight lol.
” I found ‘mothers do god’s work’ to be inexplicable. Exactly what work of god’s do mothers do?”
I think that when people say this they mean that an important part of god’s work here on earth is raising children, the next generation of Christians or whatever. That’s what I always assume people mean at least. I do find it odd, there are plenty of mothers who do a terrible job, they certainly aren’t doing any good works. All the more reason for society to support single moms (who statistically are having a harder time).
I thought you knew how human reproduction works Tyler? Was I wrong?
I just don’t imagine god doing the stuff mothers do Jack. Changing diapers, feeding etc. Of course it could be said that fathers do god’s work too. Many do exactly the same tasks that mothers do. Except the breast-feeding thing. But I can’t imagine god doing that either. Unless…..
Preaching god’s justice but not following through on it, rather, practicing god’s mercy (it should have been ‘practice’ and ‘mercy’, not ‘do’ and ‘work’ – two typos! my bad) does sound rather contradictory.
Except we don’t know another person’s intentions (unless they disclose them). In a certain sense, justice must be left to God. Any justice we do will only be an approximate of what should’ve been – this is due to our condition of ignorance - talk to Rasqual about this – he could explain this better.)
Until science fills the gap in our knowledge about how life originates all life is, in a sense, a miracle. If with the knowledge of how life originates, life will still be considered a miracle because we will still not know why there is life – just how it came to be.
“All the more reason for society to support single moms (who statistically are having a harder time).”
Or any other form of alternative family structure.
I thought you knew how human reproduction works Tyler? Was I wrong?
I will take you up on this Reality. I guess I don’t – can you please explain it to me – when does human life begin?
So only atheists see the value in the state legislating against things like robbery and murder Tyler?
So do we know how the human reproductive process works or not Tyler?
” Or any other form of alternative family structure.”
Yeah, sorry wasn’t trying to pick on single moms, it’s just what this particular blog post was on so it was the first thing that came to mind. Generally any families who aren’t a married middle-class couple need extra support. Heck I’m a single dad and I could use some.
So only atheists see the value in the state legislating against things like robbery and murder Tyler?
Where did this come from? Although we don’t know the intentions of people, we can see the result of their actions, and we are able to determine if they harm another person. I am not sure where you are going with this Reality.
I guess you could call me a single dad too Jack. Although my son was 21 and living in another state when I became single :-)
I thought you knew how human reproduction works Tyler? Was I wrong?
I will take you up on this Reality. I guess I don’t – can you please explain it to me – when does human life begin?
“Preaching god’s justice but not following through on it”
“justice must be left to God”
“Any justice we do will only be an approximate of what should’ve been”
“I am not sure where you are going with this Reality.” – I think it’s more a question of where you’re going with it!
“I guess you could call me a single dad too Jack. Although my son was 21 and living in another state when I became single ”
Lol, I have a feeling I am in a bit rougher spot than you were.
I thought you knew how human reproduction works Tyler? Was I wrong?
Can you please explain it to me – when does human life begin?
Significantly Jack. I admire your efforts. Your head seems to be well focussed on what you are doing.
I do wish you’d make up your mind Tyler. Do you want to discuss the orgins of life on planet earth or the current reproductive process of the human species? Since we were discussing miracles and babies, I’d suggest the latter.
Either one – but you wanted to talk human reproduction so I will be satisfied if you just talk about when human life begins.
Who knows maybe we will agree. I would truly like that.
What I actually wanted to talk about was how it can be that ‘babies are miracles’ when I am constantly told that we have a pretty comprehensive pool of knowledge regarding the current reproductive process of the human species.
You made a number of comments last week which gave a very strong impression that you yourself possess adequate knowledge of the current reproductive process of the human species.
The general concensus appears to be about 200,000 years ago anatomically and about 50,000 years ago behaviorally.
Thanks Reality, I appreciate it.
“Except we don’t know another person’s intentions (unless they disclose them). In a certain sense, justice must be left to God. Any justice we do will only be an approximate of what should’ve been – this is due to our condition of ignorance - talk to Rasqual about this – he could explain this better.) ”
But this is where I think “God’s justice” tends to break down. Hypothetically, say you have someone, a child rapist or whatever, who spends his life hurting people and never does any prison time, never receives any earthly justice at all. Then this guy finds out he’s dying and has few months left, so he repents and apologizes to those that he hurt and makes right with God, so to speak. So, if I understand the Bible right, he’s forgiven and gets to go to paradise and all that. I don’t understand how that’s “justice” at all. It may be God’s mercy, but it doesn’t seem like justice was served at all.
But this is where I think “God’s justice” tends to break down. Hypothetically, say you have someone, a child rapist or whatever, who spends his life hurting people and never does any prison time, never receives any earthly justice at all. Then this guy finds out he’s dying and has few months left, so he repents and apologizes to those that he hurt and makes right with God, so to speak. So, if I understand the Bible right, he’s forgiven and gets to go to paradise and all that. I don’t understand how that’s “justice” at all. It may be God’s mercy, but it doesn’t seem like justice was served at all.
The murderer was ignorant of God’s law prior to having his conversion experience (assuming it is legit and expresses genuine remorse and contrition for his past actions/deeds). He was not aware that he was breaking God’s law by killing. He has/had the capability to know God’s law because God’s law is written on everyone’s heart (and is part of our conscience), but for whatever reason he did not know God’s law. Therefore, since he did not know God’s law it is just for God to forgive him. God’s justice and mercy unite in Himself. He knows our intentions as well as our actions. He knows whether our conversion and contrition are true – indeed, in a certain sense he is the one who grants the conversion experience! So if this guy is just going through the motions – and saying he believes simply because he wants a “get-out-jail-free” card God will know and God will provide the correct justice. This guy can’t fool God. This is why Catholics believe in Purgatory. This guy will have to spend some time in purgatory.
“The murderer was ignorant of God’s law prior to having his conversion experience (assuming it is legit and expresses genuine remorse and contrition for his past actions/deeds. He was not aware that he was breaking God’s law by killing. He the capability to know God’s law because God’s law is written on everyone’s heart (and is part of our conscience), but for whatever reason he did not know God’s law.”
Well I was talking about a rapist but murderer works too.
“Therefore, since he did not know God is just in forgiving him. God’s justice and mercy unite in Him. He knows whether our conversion and contrition are true – indeed, it a certain sense he is the one grants the conversion experience himself! On the other hand, if this guy is just going through the motions – and saying he believes simply because he wants a “get-out-jail-free” card God will know and God will provide the correct justice. This guy can’t fool God. ”
So basically, he can rape people for years, never see any consequences for his actions, and because he feels remorseful and contrite in his later years God forgives him because he supposedly didn’t know or understand he was doing wrong? That’s justice? What about the victims of his crimes?
Purgatory exists because we rarely make adequate reparations in this life.
Remember God is love, goodness, justice, itself – we want to be with God, and He wants us to want to be with Him. He understands our weaknesses – that is one of the reasons he sent his Son – to show us he understands our weak and corrupt human nature.
Sorry I don’t really know what Purgatory is, I didn’t see your edit. As far as I understand Purgatory, it’s a place that people go before going to heaven to be cleansed of their sins, but I don’t understand how that is supposed to work.
I added more to the last post – but not about purgatory.
This rapist can’t undue the rape, he can’t make adequate reparations to his victims so he spends time in Purgatory – more or less time away from God his true Joy. This separation of God is where he learns to better love God, and be cleansed of his sins as you say. It is distressing to the rapist who now wants to be with God in Heaven. If we do not make adequate reparations for our wrong deeds we make those reparations in Purgatory and to God.
It seems you understand the idea pretty well Jack.
Jack if God didn’t forgive the repentant rapists would there be Justice for you or I? Where should we go?
” This rapist can’t undue the rape, he can’t make adequate reparations to his victims so he spends time in Purgatory – more or less time away from God his true Joy. This separation of God is where he learns to better love God, and be cleansed of his sins as you say. It is distressing to the rapist who now wants to be with God in Heaven. If we do not make adequate reparations for our wrong deeds we make those reparations in Purgatory and to God. ”
So he gets to be a bit distressed, then he gets to go have everlasting peace and happiness. I guess that’s fine, seems like he got off light but at least he saw some consequences. I prefer that idea to Protestant theology where he would never suffer any consequences for his actions at all, he’d just go chill with Jesus right away. I still think it’s injustice that God would rather have a child rapist who repented in heaven, but he would send a victim of the rapist to hell, a decent person who couldn’t convince themselves to believe in God possibly. But whatevs.
Avoiding spending time in purgatory is why it is so important to do good works in this life.
“Jack if God didn’t forgive the repentant rapists would there be Justice for you or I? Where should we go? ”
Eh, I don’t know. Who says that I think that my sins are forgivable? Or yours (though I don’t know yours, and I doubt they are as bad as mine)? I just don’t get how decent humans go to hell, simply because they don’t believe in God, while very very bad humans go to heaven, because they do believe in God and repented of their very bad acts. I don’t see how it makes sense.
I still think it’s injustice that God would rather have a child rapist who repented in heaven, but he would send a victim of the rapist to hell, a decent person who couldn’t convince themselves to believe in God possibly. But whatevs.
Jack, this idea is completely wrong from a Catholic perspective (which is the only perspective I feel somewhat adequate to talk about). A non-Catholic rape victim has a chance of being in Heaven according to Catholic theology. Catholics believe God’s can choose anyone he wishes to be Heaven with Him – so although the normal means of acquiring Sanctifying Grace is through faith and the Sacraments – God can override, so to speak, these means of sanctifying us. So an innocent rape victim who doesn’t believe isn’t in Hell because she failed to “believe” – If she loved God/goodness and tried to do His will she will be Heaven just like any other Catholic. Jack, as I have said before, even you got a very good shot of going to Heaven according to Catholic teaching! But once a person knows about God’s goodness and the ways he can get assistance and remedies (i.e. the Sacraments) for the sins we have committed in this life he/she should seek them (the sacraments) out.
There are a few good purgatory stories that come from the Saints. Here is a good link:http://christtotheworld.blogspot.com/search/label/VISION%20OF%20HELL
Suffering is how we invite God into our lives, thus allowing God, through a free will choice and a sin offering, to enter and elevate us above the mortal state into the spiritual state of wholeness. It is also an act of humility. When Christ entered into the world, He made of himself a clear contradiction between what is the way of the world and what is the way of the cross: creative, but more literally redemptive, suffering. Animal sacrifices to God were no longer relevant.
Penance is a way for us to reconcile ourselves to God when we sin. This is a way of giving to others or to God, a demonstration of the Commandment to Love God above all else and our neighbor as ourselves. It is not enough to say your sorry when you steal, but to also give back what you took to the best of your ability, so you know why and how what you did – you have an exact idea of the nature of the wrong, that is what purgatory is, but you can avoid that.
We can receive God’s forgiveness for terrible sins committed here on Earth, but there is also a giving that mush go with that if you want to be able to go straight to heaven when you die. From what I have read, one day of medium to intense suffering here on Earth, is equivalent to a year of agony in purgatory. You want to avoid it by valuing life and relationships during this time here on Earth.
Fast and sacrifice and pray. Offer up that stubbed toe or broken heart to Jesus and the souls in Purgatory. Say this when you bite your tongue or get a paper cut: (this was received in Fatima)
“My God, I believe, I adore, I trust and I love Thee! I beg pardon for all those that do not believe, do not adore, do not trust and do not love Thee.”
If you do these things, offer the sorrows up, then God will receive you more and more here on earth, so when you stand before Him, he will regard your sufferings as your own in atonement for your offenses against His will, and those of the whole world.
“Jack, this idea is completely wrong from a Catholic perspective (which is the only perspective I feel somewhat adequate to talk about). A non-Catholic rape victim has a chance of being in Heaven according to Catholic theology. Catholics believe God’s can choose anyone he wishes to be Heaven with Him – so although the normal means of acquiring Sanctifying Grace is through faith and the Sacraments – God can override, so to speak, these means of sanctifying us. So an innocent rape victim who doesn’t believe isn’t in Hell because she failed to “believe” – If she loved God/goodness and tried to do His will she will be Heaven just like any other Catholic. ”
Okay, I think I’m just misunderstanding because I was raised with/am more familiar with Protestant teachings, which are very heavy on the “you have to believe, if you don’t profess belief you literally can’t go heaven”. It seems like you’re saying that in Catholic theology, even some of those who don’t believe sometimes may go to heaven because they loved goodness and tried to live their lives in a good way. But how does that take into account the mortal sin aspect? From what I understand (my understanding of Catholic teaching is limited, though I have been trying to read up on it lately), mortal sin severs your relationship with God, and without repentance (and you kind of necessarily HAVE to believe to be able to repent properly) you remain severed from God, and your soul is sent to eternal damnation.
“Jack, as I have said before, even you got a very good shot of going to Heaven according to Catholic teaching! But once a person knows about God’s goodness and the ways he can get assistance and remedies (i.e. the Sacraments) for the sins we have committed in this life he/she should seek them (the sacraments) out. ”
Even me?? Am I that terrible? Lol, just kidding. But yeah, like I’ve said before, I can’t seem to force myself to believe no matter what I do, and from what I can understand from the mortal sin thing, is that no matter how genuinely sorry and repentant I am, there can’t be true repentance since I don’t believe, I can’t repair my soul’s relationship with God. Am I totally misunderstanding here?
There is one answer to all your questions Jack – ‘god moves in mysterious ways’. It doesn’t need to be explained or understood, just ‘known’.
Doesn’t matter how illogical, nonsensical or contradictory it seems there’s always an answer, often a completely different answer to the same question when it’s applied to someone else or in a slightly different context.
The convenience principle.
REALITY: you can create a zygote in a petri dish, but you yourself did not create that life, or that zygote for that matter. You don’t know what animates cell division, the nucleus of creation is still a mystery and always will be because God is miraculous and a designer. He is far, far beyond human understanding.
Putting a jigsaw together does not mean you actually created the jigsaw puzzle. You just took the pieces and aligned them in order to create a picture that was already there, just in several different pieces. It is God who designed the Human puzzle. Playing with those elements in a manner in which life is conceived, then killing that same life, is f***ing with God. It is eating fruit directly off the tree of life. We are not gods. Do not be deceived, your eyes will not be opened, you will not be ‘like-God’. You will be aware of a power, and that power will enslave you because you will get hooked on the high. Leave well enough alone. Don’t do it!
Babies are miracles because life is miraculous. The human womb cannot be recreated by mankind, ever either. These are things which are beautiful mysteries. Putting the pieces together which conceive life does not mean you conceived of that life, it means that you put the pieces together, and because God gave us freewill, you chose to abuse it, by CREATING A SITUATION in which, by carelessness or malice, caused innocent human suffering.
“There is one answer to all your questions Jack – ‘god moves in mysterious ways’. It doesn’t need to be explained or understood, just ‘known’.
Doesn’t matter how illogical, nonsensical or contradictory it seems there’s always an answer, often a completely different answer to the same question when it’s applied to someone else or in a slightly different context.”
I don’t know, it seems to work for some people, and make complete sense to them. Smart people believe this stuff. If it were just some crazies or not very intelligent people who were religious, I could disregard it, but I know a lot of highly intelligent religious people, and it makes me wonder what I’m missing, why I can’t understand or feel what they feel.
“the nucleus of creation is still a mystery and always will be because God is miraculous and a designer” – make up your mind, which one is it?
“He is far, far beyond human understanding.” – see Jack, and there was Tyler, valiantly trying to get you to understand.
“We are not gods.” – oh I definitely agree, because ‘like-God’ is an impossible concept.
“Putting the pieces together which conceive life does not mean you conceived of that life” – positively head-scratching.
Jack, there’s a website belonging to a ‘christian gentleman’ who believes the bible is inerrant, well his interpretation of it anyway. I think he’s a bit extreme. He says things like even if gay marriage is legal men will not be able to marry men and women will not be able to marry women, ever.
A couple of years ago he related the tale of the night his wife suddenly fell seriously ill (thankfully everything turned out fine). In his relating of the tale he thanked god for the traffic being light so their journey to the hospital was not impeded (hope he didn’t commit any traffic violations). He thanked god that the hospital carpark was nearly empty so they were able to get a park near the entrance. He thanked god that the emergency room was very quiet so they were attended to very quickly. He thanked god that the doctors on duty at that time were good doctors (do they have rosters of good and not so good doctors?). What I want to know is who he intended to thank for his wife falling ill. And why. Was someone being punished? What for?
“Smart people believe this stuff.” – smart people can also have drug habits, be alcoholics, be abusers of spouses or children, or practise auto-erotic asphyxiation.
I do wonder about some though. Do people like Ken Ham really believe the tripe they peddle or do they just keep up a pretence because they are sick and twisted or because they can make lotsa money? Like the televangelists, especially the ones who ‘fall’.
” A couple of years ago he related the tale of the night his wife suddenly fell seriously ill (thankfully everything turned out fine). In his relating of the tale he thanked god for the traffic being light so their journey to the hospital was not impeded (hope he didn’t commit any traffic violations). He thanked god that the hospital carpark was nearly empty so they were able to get a park near the entrance. He thanked god that the emergency room was very quiet so they were attended to very quickly. He thanked god that the doctors on duty at that time were good doctors (do they have rosters of good and not so good doctors?). What I want to know is who he intended to thank for his wife falling ill. And why. Was someone being punished? What for?”
I think there are a couple different schools of thought on that one. The way I was raised, suffering is always a punishment for sins, and if you are suffering you did something to bring it on yourself, and if you want to stop suffering you need to figure out what you did. Like, I was told that I was sexually abused because I was a sinner, that it was my fault, etc etc etc. I think that’s the most uncommon view on suffering, because I really haven’t met any other Christians who thought that way. It seems like some of them think that suffering is allowed because it brings them closer to Jesus (I would ask why an all-powerful God wouldn’t be able to bring them close to Jesus without suffering, though). It seems like most of them think that all good comes from God (so you thank God for it), but all bad comes from humans choosing to go against God, because God gave them free will. I don’t understand that, because if God created free will he obviously knew it was going to be used for evil, and doesn’t that mean he’s responsible for evil too? I’m missing something.
” I do wonder about some though. Do people like Ken Ham really believe the tripe they peddle or do they just keep up a pretence because they are sick and twisted or because they can make lotsa money? Like the televangelists, especially the ones who ‘fall’.”
I think a lot of those televangelists/people who make a lot of money of religious things are hucksters. That’s just human nature, it’s not exclusive to religion. You have people with the homeopathy stuff that can’t possibly believe what they are selling, but sell it they do. And religion is a lot harder to prove false/correct than homeopathy.
I’m sure some of those money making dudes genuinely believe what they say though.
I don’t think you’re missing anything Jack. It simply doesn’t exist.
Love how you quoted me totally out of context. You left out the part that said if she really and truly thought her baby a prop the same as soccer ball or other object then she is as dumb as a rock. I don’t believe she really believes this. I think she thought the rules didn’t apply to her because she had a baby and when the school didn’t bow to her wishes she got upset. It’s not about shaming her for pregnancy and if she had happened to be pregnant during senior pictures then I think it would be just fine to show a photo where she wasn’t hiding pregnancy. It seems every other student understood that these were not intended to be family photos so the instructions must not have been unclear. I think she knew she was breaking the rule but it was let go because they thought sh would choose another photo for the yearbook. She can be proud of being a mother without having to have her baby in her senior photo.
Ken Ham isn’t a religious huckster. He often points out that the Lord Jesus Christ, in His life here on the earth, saw the first few chapters of Genesis as real history, too. Rather than starting with the presuppositions of abiogenesis and uniformitarianism, Mr. Ham holds to the presuppositions of creation and a young earth. The Bible, which is revealed knowledge, is to him and me a greater authority than natural science, which is empirical knowledge. That’s not to dispute that the Bible treats our relationship with God and science our relationship with His creation; it’s simply a reference again to our presuppositions. Life is religion.
Reality wrote, “What I want to know is who he intended to thank for his wife falling ill. And why.”
We have ourselves, people in general, to thank. God is good; we became evil.
As Jesus Christ passed by, He saw a man blind from birth. And His disciples asked Him, “Rabbi, who sinned, this man or his parents, that he would be born blind?” Jesus answered, “It was neither that this man sinned, nor his parents; but it was so that the works of God might be displayed in him. (John 9:1-3) The Lord Jesus was saying that the man’s blindness was not a consequence of a specific sin (except maybe that of Adam’s); it was, however, a consequence of sin in general. But God even uses sin in the world, of which He is never the author, to increase His own glory.
Now on [a different] occasion there were some present who reported to Him about the Galileans whose blood Pilate had mixed with their sacrifices. And Jesus said to them, “Do you suppose that these Galileans were greater sinners than all other Galileans because they suffered this fate? I tell you, no, but unless you repent, you will all likewise perish. Or do you suppose that those eighteen on whom the tower in Siloam fell and killed them were worse culprits than all the men who live in Jerusalem? I tell you, no, but unless you repent, you will all likewise perish.” (Luke 13:1-5) The question is not why bad things happen to good people, but why good things happen to bad people. Apart from the work of Christ, we are all bad in God’s sight.
The oldest book of the Bible is probably Job. Do you know anything about Job? Do you know what God’s answer to Job was?
That wasn’t meant as a slight, Jack. From your posts it seems like you’re pretty much on your own with your kids. You seem to be a very good father.
Jack first let me apologize for not writing last night. I got really tired and end up falling asleep without signing off. Sorry.
But how does that take into account the mortal sin aspect? From what I understand (my understanding of Catholic teaching is limited, though I have been trying to read up on it lately), mortal sin severs your relationship with God, and without repentance (and you kind of necessarily HAVE to believe to be able to repent properly) you remain severed from God, and your soul is sent to eternal damnation.
Mortal sin is really an interesting concept in Catholic theology. It is different from what a lot people think it is. At one it is so subtle it touches on the most profound idea (in my opinion) of Catholic theology – the idea of our second death. As you said mortal sin severs our relationship with God in this life and if we don’t repair that relationship with God in this life we will be cut off from God in eternity – we will have a second death. This is second death only happens to those who are in mortal sin (hence the mortal part of mortal sin – it is a great play on words too!) in this life. According to Catholic teaching our actions in this life have eternal consequences. So while all Catholics die (save those alive at the time of the last judgment) those Catholics who are not in mortal sin never experience this second death in eternity – they get to Heaven. After learning this teaching of the importance of our works in this life I began to understand why Jesus said “Enter through the narrow gate; for the gate is wide and the way is broad that leads to destruction, and there are many who enter through it.” And he preached about the last judgment in Matthew 25:31-46. I am not sure how the last judgment is understood without the concept of the importance of good works.
Finally, some technical points about mortal sin. Mortal sin requires the intention and full consent of the sinner. The sinner must know what they are doing is wrong and still consent to do it. So a young child accidently killing his sibling would not constitute a mortal sin. Although killing is wrong, the child did not intend to kill and therefore did not really consent to commit to sinning. Once you understand the Catholic idea of good works and mortal sin you start to understand how our criminal law system works. Some one who was not Catholic would in many ways would be in similar situation. However, if they were given a glimpse of God’s justice and knew in their hearts that what they were doing was wrong then yes they would’ve committed a mortal sin. Part of the Catholic good news is that you can obtain forgiveness here in this life for mortal sins by simply going to a Priest and seeking forgiveness. This is hard to do no doubt, I struggle with this myself, but it is one of the means God granted to us so that we may experience his forgiveness.
Although we believe that the Sacraments are the normal means God established for receiving his forgiveness and the salvific work of Jesus, He, himself, is not restricted to using only those means. For example he declared Abraham righteous just by Abraham’s faith.
But yeah, like I’ve said before, I can’t seem to force myself to believe no matter what I do, and from what I can understand from the mortal sin thing, is that no matter how genuinely sorry and repentant I am, there can’t be true repentance since I don’t believe, I can’t repair my soul’s relationship with God. Am I totally misunderstanding here?
First let me begin by saying that even Reality has a chance to go to Heaven. He has a concern for women that I am sure God appreciates.
Jack, I have a question for you that may seem strange at first but think about it a second time: how can a person be truly repentant if they don’t believe in God. Meaning, if God is goodness itself if a person feels repentant they are believing in God just under the name of goodness. They see the Goodness they offended! This innocent conception of God/goodness and repentance is what children see with their clear un-jaded eyes. So if you will permit to draw a conclusion from your statements: I would say they you believe in God because you believe in Goodness. God for Jack has assumed the name Goodness and that is ok.
Jack, just one more thing – you can never “feel” God without first knowing Him. To believe in God a person first must know God and that is an intellectual process and an act of the will. One cannot experience (feel) God if one does not know who God is first. Yet you seem to know one of God’s attributes already: His goodness. It appears to me you have experienced it as well. The more of God’s positive attributes a person knows, the more a person can experience those attributes – this is an odd way of explaining what it means to become more virtuous.
Sadly, we don’t talk enough about being virtuous enough in our society.
Jack, I would be interested in knowing how Protestants understand the last judgment. Would you happen to know this? (I realize the understanding of the last judgment may vary among the different Protestant denominations so perhaps you can tell me how your denomination understood it. I would also like to know how the Baptist understanding of the last judgment – if anyone knows.)
Jack I like the fact that you are talking about God …..not pushing conversion or anything . I have questioned God many times . Am I really supposed to believe God exists ? I’ve always believed but many times I have no understanding. I tried once to be agnostic but that was just a faze. That being said the thought of dying and returning to a deep sleep or nothingness in the afterlife depresses the hell out of me. I know I will be reunited with my loved ones and God when I die. Also my dead animals . I have my own pictures of heaven and what it would be like. If I thought life was the end with no afterlife I believe I would have killed myself years ago.
Since this is an yearbook of the students why should she pose with her baby ? If we follow her reasoning (that the baby helped her to be where and what she is now) then all the other students should pose with their siblings/parents/grandparents/teachers/friends and all those that helped them become who they are :) This is pretty ridiculous, especially since the yearbook has a section for family where she can add her picture with her baby too.
I do not think this has anything to do with teen pregnancy but more with “I am special” attitude. Yes, she is special and she has a beautiful baby and in 18 years when the baby will finish high-school will have the chance to be in the yearbook too… until then the baby is just “family” ;)
I have seen so much human suffering in my 26 years of nursing . Id often cry for my patients . A paralyzed 22 year old in a wheelchair forever. Tons of young adults Why God? Why? Count your blessings today.
Since this is an yearbook of the students why should she pose with her baby ?
Because the adults running the school should have been mature enough to realize that this is not a battle worth fighting. Had Caitlin been told at the photo shoot, it would be a different story. As it is, the adults look more immature than a teenager.
My high school was very particular about our yearbook photos. This one wouldn’t have passed, not because of the baby, but because your head had to fill up a certain amount of the frame and had to be facing a certain way. While we still had a plethora of beautiful shots of different sorts, and they were all unique and lovely, they also had a certain consistency which worked well and avoided this scenario.
We had a slideshow at the end of the year to which we were welcome to offer any photos from the year and as long as they were deemed appropriate, they were included. This would have been completely acceptable and a nice compromise.
“Jack, I have a question for you that may seem strange at first but think about it a second time: how can a person be truly repentant if they don’t believe in God. Meaning, if God is goodness itself if a person feels repentant they are believing in God just under the name of goodness. They see the Goodness they offended! This innocent conception of God/goodness and repentance is what children see with their clear un-jaded eyes. So if you will permit to draw a conclusion from your statements: I would say they you believe in God because you believe in Goodness. God for Jack has assumed the name Goodness and that is ok.”
Okay, if you think that my concept of what is “good” is actually just me believing in God. I guess that makes sense. But I think things are “good” that you would call evil. For example, I would find a loving gay couple “good”, but I doubt you would claim that comes from God. It all seems rather arbitrary.
“Jack, just one more thing – you can never “feel” God without first knowing Him. To believe in God a person first must know God and that is an intellectual process and an act of the will. One cannot experience (feel) God if one does not know who God is first. Yet you seem to know one of God’s attributes already: His goodness. It appears to me you have experienced it as well. The more of God’s positive attributes a person knows, the more a person can experience those attributes – this is an odd way of explaining what it means to become more virtuous. ”
Okay I don’t really know what you’re saying here. You seem to be saying more of the “goodness = God” stuff. So you believe that anything positive that I believe or do, like idk not being an amoral jerk, is actually me learning about God?
“Jack, I would be interested in knowing how Protestants understand the last judgment. Would you happen to know this? (I realize the understanding of the last judgment may vary among the different Protestant denominations so perhaps you can tell me how your denomination understood it. I would also like to know how the Baptist understanding of the last judgment – if anyone knows.)”
I don’t know what Baptists believe. My parent’s church taught that when someone died, they were immediately sent to heaven or hell depending on whether they believed, if they died with unforgiven sin, and whether or not God hated them (seriously, that last one isn’t a typical belief, because I don’t think that most Protestant denominations are so deterministic). I’m fuzzy on the “final judgment” aspect, but I think that they believed that Jesus would rapture all the Good Christians ™ away, then Satan would run the earth for a while, and then everyone, living or dead would have to stand before God and all their misdeeds and sins would be shown to everyone, even their bad thoughts. Then God would determine whether they would spend eternity in heaven or hell. And remember they were determinist, so they did think that God just didn’t like some people and it was impossible for them to reach heaven (again I think this is a rare belief, and I hate that belief since my mom told me all the time that I was obviously one of those that God didn’t like). So idk is that what you mean by last judgement?
Okay, if you think that my concept of what is “good” is actually just me believing in God. I guess that makes sense. But I think things are “good” that you would call evil. For example, I would find a loving gay couple “good”, but I doubt you would claim that comes from God. It all seems rather arbitrary.
There is a hard teaching by the Church that says we are to respect the consciences of all individuals so Jack if you truly believe that gay relationships are loving the Church would respect that is your belief even though the Church disagrees with you. I am not sure what you are calling arbitrary. Perhaps you are saying your own definition of what is good is arbitrary? I am not sure. Anyways, the Church’s notion of what is good is not arbitrary. The Church has clearly defined what is good in relation to the natural moral law – basically what the Church views as the purposes of humankind’s life. The starting definition for Good can be seen by how Aquinas defined love: willing the good of the other. From this starting point the Church has developed a keen sense of what is good for the human person – and it is this “set” of good things/actions that it calls morality/the virtues/etc. However, it is at this point, the Church’s teaching on morality, that most people want to jump ship, or even try to change Church teaching – very few people will accept the Church’s teaching and even fewer actually live out.
The Church would say love is always good but two men should not express that love in a physical manner. The Church is not stuck on certain acts. The Church believes the each human being has a freewill to conquer any inappropriate appetites, so that these appetites can’t force a human to commit an indecent act. The Church believes Jesus gave us the Holy Spirit, and the Sacraments, and actual graces to overcome these appetites. So though it identifies certain acts as immoral it believes that human beings are able to refrain from doing such acts.
Okay I don’t really know what you’re saying here. You seem to be saying more of the “goodness = God” stuff. So you believe that anything positive that I believe or do, like idk not being an amoral jerk, is actually me learning about God?
Yes that is exactly what I am saying. All goodness comes from God. If anyone is good, that is a gift from God. Unlike some of our Protestant brethren the Church views everyone as fundamentally good – we were all created good. The Church does recognize that we are fallen and that we sin but that is secondary to the fact that we were first created good. Indeed, another part of why Jesus came was to show us that God has not forgotten that he original created us good and has a plan for us. Sometimes talking about Church teaching is embarrassing because it is so childlike. But that it is the Church’s teaching – it is not way above us – the best or perhaps easiest example of Catholic saints are innocent children loving their friends and family (not when they are fighting). God is simple, many of the Saints (Paul, Augustine, Francis, Clare, Therese of Lisieux, Teresa of Avila, etc…) have taught that it is by living a simple life that we become closer to God and see his goodness.
Well you discussed the last judgment more than I anticipated - my fault for not being more specific. Specifically, I was wondering what exactly Protestants believe God is judging if they don’t believe good works are meritorious. I guess it’s somewhat of a theological or technical question.
Sorry for my sloppy writing and lack of editing..
“Ken Ham isn’t a religious huckster.” – I sorta agree. I think he’s an all-out huckster.
“The Bible, which is revealed knowledge” – no it’s not. Some people believe it is and that’s fine for them, but it’s not factual.
“Life is religion” – que?
“It was neither that this man sinned, nor his parents; but it was so that the works of God might be displayed in him.” – your average forensic psychologist would have a field day with that.
“even Reality has a chance to go to Heaven” – not true.
“He has a concern for women” – true.
Jack,
My two cents.
I am not Catholic. My beliefs are so different. I have never found scriptural evidence for purgatory and do not believe that it is good works that save us.
I would hope that you would seek out others rather than taking Tyler’s view on everything.
I never take one person’s word on anything. :)
By all means, I encourage everyone to talk to others. I was thinking about how I am not even trained in Catholic theology!
Carla, would you mind explaining how you understand the last judgment. What is Jesus judging us for at the last judgment if not for our good works? Ever since my conversation with Alice I have been wondering about this. I am genuinely interested to know what the different Protestant denominations think on the subject. I have even looked it up on the internet and I can’t find anyone really answering this question. In any event, I would rather hear it from someone than read about it anyway.
Maybe if Alice is around she can answer my question too.
This is what wikipaedia says about the Lutheran belief on the last judgment:
Lutherans do not believe in any sort of earthly millennial kingdom of Christ either before or after his second coming on the last day.[5] On the last day,[6] all the dead will be resurrected.[7] Their souls will then be reunited with the same bodies they had before dying.[8] The bodies will then be changed, those of the wicked to a state of everlasting shame and torment,[9] those of the righteous to an everlasting state of celestial glory.[10] After the resurrection of all the dead,[11] and the change of those still living,[12] all nations shall be gathered before Christ,[13] and he will separate the righteous from the wicked.[14] Christ will publicly judge[15] all people by the testimony of their faith,[16] the good works[17] of the righteous in evidence of their faith,[18] and the evil works of the wicked in evidence of their unbelief.[19] He will judge in righteousness[20] in the presence of all and men and angels,[21] and his final judgement will be just damnation to everlasting punishment for the wicked and a gracious gift of life everlasting to the righteous.[
To me this just sounds like someone who decided to split hairs so that they could say they disagree with the Catholic Church, and hide a mistake they made earlier by denying Church teaching. Hmm.., good works are not meritorious but faith is – but only if evidenced by good works! This seems a little sneaky and quite the technicality. I wonder if these guys figured out which came first – the chicken or the egg. Can someone tell if this Wikipedia section is a fair description of the Lutheran understanding of the last judgment. It really seems like some corrupted version of Catholic teaching.
Reality – yes, as long as you are alive, you still have a chance to fix your relationship with God and be with Him in Heaven.
Not sure what happened there.
I truly hope that all the divisions in the Church weren’t due to this kind of hairsplitting.
I appreciate the sentiment Tyler, but that is simply an impossibility.
May I ask you Reality why you think it is an impossibility?
Because there is/are no god/s. But you already knew that Tyler.
I’ll post it again more time for good measure, a poster quoted me as calling the young lady dumb. I didn’t at all. I said that if she really, truly though her infant was a “prop” or an “object” she was dumb as a rock. I don’t think she thinks that. Prax I know you like to get loud, blunt and in everybody’s face. Whatever works for you. You crossed the line when you yanked out huge chunks of text including part where I said she looked nice in the picture.
So now, Prax has diagnosed me with post abortion rage that I can’t possibly have sense I have never been pregnant. This is slander because it is not true. If this sight doesn’t want to follow it’s own rules that is up to them. And Prax, if you think your faux medical diagnosis has stabbed me in the heart and brought forth tears of regret you are wrong. My “rage” is that you are a bully and you don’t get to bully me. I’m not a perfect person but there a quite a few hypocritical duds and dudettes who need to do some work on their own before condemning other.
I know I’m not welcome here because only people who have as many kids as possible, think all birth control is a sin and get their panties in a wad because our president goes to an Irish bar that their group goes to at another time of the year
Your “code of conduct” here is a joke. It is not enforced and this was just when I was reader not contributor. Certain people get away with far more than others do here.
But, this is your board and have fun with it, even if the rules are a joke
” I know I’m not welcome here because only people who have as many kids as possible, think all birth control is a sin and get their panties in a wad because our president goes to an Irish bar that their group goes to at another time of the year
Your “code of conduct” here is a joke. It is not enforced and this was just when I was reader not contributor. Certain people get away with far more than others do here.
But, this is your board and have fun with it, even if the rules are a joke”
Well… as long as you didn’t vote for Obama and aren’t cool with abortion people are generally nice! All the other stuff is just a bonus in most people’s minds.
And I missed it earlier. Thank you Megan I appreciate it.
What’s done is done. This young woman CHOSE to KEEP her baby! And she chose not to hide in shame and drop out of school. Her choice to get an education so that she can have a better life for herself and her child is great! Would you have her hide in shame and drop out and let you the tax payer be her invisible ‘husband’? Her choice to keep her child is a testament to life! This speaks to her peers and grown women, and men, as well. The society we live in says babies/children are a burden but the smile on this young woman’s face says just the opposite! You may not agree with the premarital sex part but things are past that now! Support the fact that this girl chose to let her baby live, she chose LIFE, and is also choosing to go for education! This isn’t the 1970’s and prior where women had to “hide hide their shame” and secretly hide in the countryside somewhere and wait to have their babies while the men/boyfriends got off scot free. You older women should know better, good grief.
Hi Tenn,
I am the lead moderator. carla@jillstanek.com
If there is ever an issue please email one of the mods directly. We try to do our best but we also don’t blogsit 24/7.
I said that if she really, truly though her infant was a “prop” or an “object” she was dumb as a rock.
You cannot defend the fact that this young lady had her photos taken at the school and was allowed to hold her son for the photo shoot. I believe she should have been told that at the time that he was not allowed and I said this several times throughout this thread. I also said the adults should have taken the higher ground and tightened up the rules next year.
I believe that you continuing to insinuate that her child is a “prop” or an “object” is just wrong. Arguing for arguments sake makes you sound post-abortive. If you didn’t call Caitlin “dumb as a rock”, I didn’t accuse you of being post-abortive. All I said was, “post-abortive much?” Take it as you will.
Where is the adult accountability? The principal blames the yearbook adviser Where is the school board responsibility in all this? Seems some want this young mom to feel shame but who was responsible for telling her that she would not be allowed to put the photo in at the time of the photo shoot? It seems more than a bit confusing to allow the photo shoot with the baby IN THE SCHOOL but then a YEAR later, tell her everyone’s choice of photo is allowed but hers.
Love them both.
Meh. When I was in high school, the teacher in charge of the school musical made her dog and both of her young kids part of the cast. Draw your own conclusions.
I know I’m not welcome here because only people who have as many kids as possible, think all birth control is a sin and get their panties in a wad because our president goes to an Irish bar that their group goes to at another time of the year
LOL. If it makes you feel better to believe this. . . . .
do not believe that it is good works that save us.
Carla, FYI, the Catholic Church doesn’t teach that we are saved by good works. We are saved by the grace of God.
Jack, the five solas and TULIP are not found in the Bible either. Carla was incorrect when she said there wasn’t any biblical support for Purgatory. There is: http://www.scripturecatholic.com/purgatory.html. Moreover, reason tells us the Bible cannot be the sole authority left to us by Jesus.
Good works count - they merit us Heaven (Jesus, by His Grace, made Heaven possible for us) - indeed, doing bad works risks the very salvation Jesus obtained for us. The goodness you do Jack matters in God’s eyes. In addition to Jesus explicitly telling us that our good works will be judged, our natural intuition of justice demands that they will be judged and that they matter.