Babies as Fashion Accessories

It’s difficult to get your head around the spike of high school teen pregnancies in Gloucester, Massachusetts. So far the number this year is seventeen in this fishing community of 30,000 residents.

Naturally, liberal organizations, personified by the Massachusetts Alliance on Teen Pregnancy, immediately blamed the school district’s ban on free contraceptives as the culprit. So far the evidence doesn’t support this cause and effect.

Based on the informal testimony of the school’s principal, Joseph Sullivan, many of these 14 to 16 year old girls made a concerted effort to become pregnant. Thus, it seems disingenuous to blame the pregnancies on the lack of birth control remedies available at the school.

It’s difficult to imagine that the majority of these children’s parents are not disappointed and puzzled and troubled by the situation. The community doesn’t benefit, nor does the school. And anyone would have to be callous not to be concerned about the bleak future of the unborn.

The media’s appraisal of the root causes and antidotes for Gloucester’s baby epidemic unfailingly mirrors the politics of the editorial boards of the publications.

The liberal dominated press doesn’t embrace teen pregnancy, but it goes to great lengths to blame the parents and religion. That Gloucester is a predominately Catholic community provides them ammunition to bash religion. They infer that personal responsibility and absolute truths are antiquated Christian-centric notions, and are a primary cause of teen pregnancy.

These socialists promote the state as the best source of guidance, and advocate state intervention in the rearing of children. This objective is camouflaged under the guise of shared responsibility. There is no surprise here. For nearly five decades every piece of legislation promoted by the leftwing encourages state encroachment on individual freedoms.

Conservatives are outraged. The terms “slut” and “bastards” are frequently heard on the last bastion where conservatives voice opinion, talk radio. The callers and pundits are quick to deride a culture that requires $9 billion annually to underwrite the cost of promiscuity. Unfortunately, bombast is no substitute for solutions.

Neither side can deny the culture of principled behavior is unraveling. Liberals applaud the disappearance of moral standards and conservatives bemoan the fact. Every parent, who deserves the title, understands the influence of the media on their children’s aspirations and decisions.

Any society whose tax policies force both parents into the job market, underwrites daycare to compensate, promotes instant gratification and judges the value of people by their possessions should not be surprised that its children would adopt the same standards.

Bill Albert, the Chief Program Officer of The National Campaign, offered an insightful comment about the mindset of young girls eager to be mothers. He suggested that they regard “babies as an accessory.” Maybe our society has sunk to this level.

The observation makes sense based on the trends in our culture depicted in movies such as Juno and Knocked Up. Sexual indiscretion is glorified, and the aftermath is bathed in happy ever after endings. Kids don’t worry about tomorrow. As with the current rage for tattoos, pushing a baby carriage down a school hall is the ultimate fashion statement.

It makes you question what would happen if the income taxes of one parent were reduced 75% if the other parent stayed home and tended the children. The nation would benefit from this investment in family.

NOTE: Anyone looking for accurate data on teen pregnancy should spend thirty minutes on TheNationalCampaign.org website. But be warned: Stay away if you are offended by the truth.