Pregnant Student Banned from Graduation, Walks

  • Thread starter Thread starter CinciMom
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
40.png
TPJCatholic:
katherine,

We do not know when the list for graduation was made, we do not know if the boy had already made some statement prior to graduation, we just do not have enough information. However, if the school was biased against the girl, then that is just flat wrong.
Click to expand...
I think you are on a thin thread. The kids were a known couple and the boy never denied his paternity. The boy could have been told he could not attend up until the hour of the event. The school should have realized she did not get pregnant by herself.

Now, I guess the only remaining recourse is that the school just “forgot to ask”.

Yeah, right. And maybe she forget to tell them she is married to the boy.
 
40.png
fix:
Lisa,

I often agree with you, but not here. What does abortion have to do with this discussion?

The news blurb does not give enough information to come to the conclusion you seemed to have come to.
Click to expand...
I agree with you too 99% of the time and this is probably the 1% here.What does that have to do with abortion is this,by not giving the father the same sentence it further pushes the notion to these girls,that the other half of the fornication has no responsibilty in the situation:nope: Will suffer no consequences:nope: From all appearences it looks as though because you see the proof due to her being pregnant,that is why she was banned from walking:mad: If you ban one ban the other,I have nothing but boys and I have taught them right and wrong if they chose to do something like that and the same situation arose at a school my son would not walk either and I would blast the school and ask them why the double standard?The humiliation of being banned with the father is one thing at least you are dealing with both parties to ban just the pregnant one:nope: A lot of the young people are immature it is not the unborn baby at fault here but if she wasn’t visibly pregnant she would be allowed to walk,to relinquish the father from responsibility is unthinkable to me and furthers the problem of girls freaking out and feeling like killing their baby is the only option.By all appearences it looks like the fornication is not being punished just the pregnancy:mad:
 
katherine,

That is a nitpick.

I agree, if the boy was not disciplined at all, then the school did wrong by discipling only the girl.
 
Lisa,

The pregnancy was the visible result of the sin…the sin was being disciplined. We do not know enough about the boy’s situation to make harsh judgments.
 
40.png
TPJCatholic:
Lisa,

The pregnancy was the visible result of the sin…the sin was being disciplined. We do not know enough about the boy’s situation to make harsh judgments.
Click to expand...
no matter how much we know, we are not at liberty to make harsh judgements. Our judgements should be kind, charitable and Christ-like.
 
Folks,

The sin caused the pregnancy…the sin is being disciplined. It is obvious. Do not make the child the center, it is not the child’s fault.
 
40.png
TPJCatholic:
Lisa,

The pregnancy was the visible result of the sin…the sin was being disciplined. We do not know enough about the boy’s situation to make harsh judgments.
Click to expand...
Well we need to find out more because if she was because she showed “proof” of the sin and the boy did not:nope: That is wrong,period!Wait a minute the boy was there participating in the sin that resulted in the pregnancy as well,it again is boiling down with the visible sign and not the sin:eek:
 
Katherine,

I agree, we should never judge anyone harshly…my point is I think some fairly jarsh judgments are being proposed about the boy and we just do not know anything on his end. If the school took no action agianst the boy, then they were just flat wrong to do that…yet the article does not say much about his situation.

In any event, it took two people to make that baby.
 
Lisa,

I feel you are trying to find a way to get the girl off the hook. The boy is every bit as culpable, sadly we just do not know enough about what the school did with him. The school might have been able to prove who the father was…or any number of other things…we just do not know. Yet, regardless of the boy’s culpability, that does not erase the girl’s culpability. If the school was wrong about how they responded to the boy, that does not mean they were wrong about they responded to the girl (they are two individuals, they are NOT one). If the girl went to confession, she could not have gotten absolution for the boy, he had to do that himself.
 
40.png
TPJCatholic:
Lisa,

I feel you are trying to find a way to get the girl off the hook. The boy is every bit as culpable, sadly we just do not know enough about what the school did with him. The school might have been able to prove who the father was…or any number of other things…we just do not know. Yet, regardless of the boy’s culpability, that does not erase the girl’s culpability. If the school was wrong about how they responded to the boy, that does not mean they were wrong about they responded to the girl (they are two individuals, they are NOT one). If the girl went to confession, she could not have gotten absolution for the boy, he had to do that himself.
Click to expand...
How am I trying to get the girl off the hook?What?:eek: How is the boy less culpable?I said if the school wants to punish one,then punish the other how is that attempting to get anyone off the hook?
 
40.png
Lisa4Catholics:
How am I trying to get the girl off the hook?What?:eek: How is the boy less culpable?I said if the school wants to punish one,then punish the other how is that attempting to get anyone off the hook?
Click to expand...
So if two people rob a store with no witnesses and we can only pin possession of the stolen good s on one, then that one should be let free, simply because we cannot convict the other?
 
Besides not one of has suggested that the boy shouldn’t be punished as well. Just because they may have dropped the ball on one, is no reason to let the other slide.
 
40.png
Lisa4Catholics:
I agree with you too 99% of the time and this is probably the 1% here.What does that have to do with abortion is this,by not giving the father the same sentence it further pushes the notion to these girls,that the other half of the fornication has no responsibilty in the situation:nope: Will suffer no consequences:nope: From all appearences it looks as though because you see the proof due to her being pregnant,that is why she was banned from walking:mad: If you ban one ban the other,I have nothing but boys and I have taught them right and wrong if they chose to do something like that and the same situation arose at a school my son would not walk either and I would blast the school and ask them why the double standard?The humiliation of being banned with the father is one thing at least you are dealing with both parties to ban just the pregnant one:nope: A lot of the young people are immature it is not the unborn baby at fault here but if she wasn’t visibly pregnant she would be allowed to walk,to relinquish the father from responsibility is unthinkable to me and furthers the problem of girls freaking out and feeling like killing their baby is the only option.By all appearences it looks like the fornication is not being punished just the pregnancy:mad:
Click to expand...
Lisa,

No one has said there ought to be a double standrad. What I am saying is the article does not give enough information to draw that conclusion. We all agree, both students are culpable.
 
40.png
Trelow:
So if two people rob a store with no witnesses and we can only pin possession of the stolen good s on one, then that one should be let free, simply because we cannot convict the other?
Click to expand...
That is exactly why the radical feminist are so angry:nope: I am not one,but I will tell you as long as the man has no consequences then why in the world should they learn to respect women or take responsibility.The pregnancy is her scarlet letter,huh?With your example if the other person “got rid” of the stolen goods both would be in the clear,right?
 
40.png
katherine2:
His name was printed in the program produced by teh school. Her’s was not.
Click to expand...
Where is this info stated? Have all parties agreed on who the father is? Do we know why one party was banned and the other was not? How are you so sure of all this?
 
40.png
Lisa4Catholics:
That is exactly why the radical feminist are so angry:nope: I am not one,but I will tell you as long as the man has no consequences then why in the world should they learn to respect women or take responsibility.The pregnancy is her scarlet letter,huh?With your example if the other person “got rid” of the stolen goods both would be in the clear,right?
Click to expand...
Where is the evidence that the boy was not punished or who the father actually is? Where is the evidence as to specifically was the girl was told to not participate?
 
40.png
TPJCatholic:
Folks,

The sin caused the pregnancy…the sin is being disciplined. It is obvious. Do not make the child the center, it is not the child’s fault.
Click to expand...
That is true and in addition we have no authentic evidence as to why the girl was told not to come. We have one reason listed, that may not be the entire story.
 
40.png
fix:
Lisa,

No one has said there ought to be a double standrad. What I am saying is the article does not give enough information to draw that conclusion. We all agree, both students are culpable.
Click to expand...
From all appearences it looks as though only one was shamed to not walk or to be put on the graduation list.I said earlier I have all boys and unless they are held to higher standards these things are going to keep happening.It does appear that the punishment landed only on the girl and that is not right.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top