In response to:

Obama’s HHS ‘Grooming’ Children for Sex

Pete702 Wrote: Oct 29, 2012 8:51 AM
If they are going to do anything they need to get rid of some of the progressive laws regarding girls and pregnancy. When I was a foster parent, I found out, from the kids, that the girls wanted to get pregnant as early as possible because then they would be emancipated and free to do what they wanted instead of what they should do. They could collect welfare, food stamps, and get their own places, but only if they had a kid. This is not right. I think that if a girl gets pregnant before graduating from High School, the child should become a ward of the girls parents (or the boys if he is also too young) and they have the option to raise it, adopt it out, or give it to the state. That is what they do in the UK.
Kepha Wrote: Oct 29, 2012 9:02 AM
Frankly, HS teachers should have the authority to tell their girl students, "Look, getting work home to you when you're in the last stages of pregnancy and beginning motherhood is a big hassle. If you get preggers, you fail the quarter unless I see your name on the family court docket suing the sire [they're NOT fathers, believe me] of your kid for support."

That's what today's folks understand.
KevNC Wrote: Oct 29, 2012 9:06 AM
The law states that children cannot be denied an education. Teachers don't get to use moral judgements to decide who receives an education and who doesn't.
you've been served Wrote: Oct 29, 2012 10:11 AM
There you go again, kevNC. Another straw man. That would not be a moral judgement. That would be a practical consequence of the teen pregnancy. The teacher would merely be conducting school in a practical manner, not throwing out a moral judgement. Straw man, Kevin. Do you live near a corn field. You must because your arguments are sure corny. Deftly deceitful little arguments. though. I will give you that much. You are good at twisting the arguments out of shape.
KevNC Wrote: Oct 29, 2012 10:18 AM
Excuse me? Teachers are required by law to provide an education to all students. That is a fact. You and the previous poster feel that pregnant students should not receive work from the school simply because they are pregnant and putting work together is extra work for the teacher. I am a teacher, and I have provided work for students who are out due to pregnancy. Yes, it is a lot of work, but it comes with the job. If some teachers don't like it, too bad. And why should the girl's grade depend on whether or not she sues the baby's father for support? That makes no sense at all.
you've been served Wrote: Oct 29, 2012 11:08 AM
another straw man kevin. "all students" is not true. ONly when those students abide by the stated conditions. it is always "quid pro quo." Another straw man when you say that I feel that "pregnant students should not receive work". YOu pulled that opinion out of thin air. I merely disagreed with your reasoning strategy. You are blinded by your rose colored glasses.

(Warning: The following contains disturbing information of a sexual nature.)

My strength is as the strength of ten, because my heart is pure. ~ Alfred Lord Tennyson

My dear friend and colleague Dr. Judith Reisman, a visiting law professor at Liberty University School of Law, recently guest lectured during “Sexual Behavior and the Law,” a course I teach. Dr. Reisman’s lecture was filmed by CSPAN and will be airing soon.

In past years, Dr. Reisman has served as scientific consultant to four U.S. Department of Justice administrations, the U.S. Department of Education and the U.S. Department of...