17 October 2007

Baby pills for our babies

Good Morning, Y'all :o)

I just finished watching ABC New's Good Morning America, where they had on Glenn Beck and Logan Levkoff discussing prescribing birth control pills to our girls in Junior High.

I don't know how I feel about that... yet... let me think on it.
But here are some of my initial thoughts:

Haven't there been studies showing the pill causes cancer, especially in women (and in this case, I use the term lightly) who smoke? And we've been told our kids are smoking as young as nine now. I know, some people say they're having sex that young, too. I don't know if I want to believe that.

Aren't you only supposed to take it for no more than ten years? So, when they're 21... what?

Sure, it keeps the kids from being parents, (and ironically keeps the parents from being parents) but it also (this is where my mind goes to the Stephen King side of the realm of life - things that go bump in the night) keeps the pedophile parent from worrying about fathering his own grandchild.

And, it puts the onus and responsibility on the female - much like that new vaccination with is supposed to take care of... I don’t remember...  25% of the HPV virus - the virus girls get from having sex with boys which can cause PID and then cervical cancer in some females.

My first three children were born in the 1%... meaning - I was on birth control when I found out they were obstinate zygotes. And, they have yet to follow my wishes. Viola! Three kids under five years of age. The pill is supposed to be 99% accurate (or as my mom says - ak-rit) but supposed to be's don't always be's.

Why don't we just clip the boy? You know, reversible v? Or medically castrate him? I hear the male of the species has a sex drive 20 thousand times greater (calm yourself - I exaggerated for effect) than us poor, frustrated women (which I don't believe for a second - we women are just so much more sophisticated and demure... and have been told our entire lives GOOD girls aren't supposed to engage in it, until we're at least engaged, that is), so isn't it his responsibility to make sure his gift isn't one which keeps on giving? What threat do our girls pose on our boys?

Don't get up on your high horse. Much I say is tongue-in-cheek. And, since I have five girls, I have a different and biased point of view here.

These are our children. Do you want the school to administer birth control without your knowledge when they already have the right to distribute condoms?

I think handing our burdens to the schools in regard to what our kids eat and what they watch and what prescriptions they take and the morals/values/concepts, etc., we want them to learn is irresponsible. I remember one 'poster' said she wanted the school to teach her child how to survive in this world... I disagree. I want the school to teach my child her three Rs - wRiting, Reading, aRithmetic (I still do that thing... which, come to think of it is probably socially unacceptable now - a red Indian thought he might eat toast in church - my second grade teacher taught me that to help me learn how to spell arithmetic.) She taught me to spell. She didn't teach me tolerance. That was a job for my parents. (Thank you, Mom).

On the flip side - some kids can't go to their parents to do the 'right' thing by getting on the pill if they want to have sex. (It still makes my stomach turn to think of little girls having sex with little boys). Let me clarify - I don't think it's either right or wrong to go on the pill. Not my call if your child is doing this. I only worry about mine - not because I'm a heartless bitc... um, well, you know what you called me - but because I'm only responsible for mine and your values aren't the same as mine - so how dare I impose my beliefs and values on what you want for your child. I wouldn't want you to impose yours on us. Don’t get me wrong - if I see you abuse your child, I'm making a phone call. And, I'm not talking about discipline - I'm speaking of real abuse.

Maybe it's more about teaching our girls to think for themselves and not be pressured in to having sex.

Maybe they shouldn't be exposed (ha ha, no pun intended) so early to the joys of sex.

I know if someone handed me a condom in Jr High, I would have looked at it and thought something like: "Why are they putting balloons in wrappers now?" But that was over a hundred years ago - things were much different then.

Enjoy & In Joy,
...

5 comments:

Anonymous said...

I really enjoyed your baby pill blog today - what next? Radical you - expecting the tax payer supported legislatively mandated school to teach something as trivial and petty as the three R's when there is so much morality to be harped on and legislated. Silly woman, let those smarter than yourself determine what's best for your children. If it is so important they learn to read, write and rithmetic, maybe you could touch on those subjects (ideals) during lunch hours in your hot/cold car while you selfishly gorge on PB&Js. BTW - you can always idle your car to keep the heat/ac going for your own personal comfort, as long as the noble Gorephobics don't deem you too selfish or anti-enviro, Bitch! Dress appropriately! Stop making your personal comfort a group issue! Cheeez!

Sandra Miller Linhart said...

If I can stop laughing long enough...

Thank you.

I needed that.

I think I just peed my pants laughing so hard.

S

Sandra Miller Linhart said...

I just heard on the news (I don't know if this info is ak-rit - I haven't researched it) it is against MA law for anyone to have sex with a child under the age of 14 - regardless of the age of the partner... so how in the world is it legal for the MA school board to okay this?

If someone is pregnant in Jr. High - which I guess a number of children have shown up pregnant - which was the reason behind this measure (or, as my mom would say: May-zure), why didn't someone call the cops or child protective services?

How can you legally dispense physician-prescribed medication to children who are illegally having sex? Wouldn't you then be culpable after the fact? Wouldn't you, in essence, be aiding and abetting in breaking the law?

That's like saying, "Well, the 11 year old girl's already drunk... I just administered a cup of coffee to help sober her up!"

Come to think of it - that's not the same thing. Coffee hasn't been proven to cause cancer; it's not a prescription drug; it doesn't need a physician's exam to ensure you're healthy enough to drink it.

But, shouldn't a drunk child at least bring out the responsible adult in each of us and wave that red flag like a monkey?

And shouldn't a pregnant child raise at least an eyebrow?

Right now, I can hear that nurse say, "Oh well, boys will be boys."

Maybe sex should be linked to peanut butter somehow and then parents will become more involved!?

Wait. Isn't Ted Kennedy from MA? 'Nuff said. I'm told he's a lousy date.

In Joy,
S

Sandra Miller Linhart said...

Wait! My bad... I guess it's ME, not MA. Sorry about the vowel movement.

Thank you, Sis, for pointing out my mistake. Go on, rub it in some more...

I'll just tell everyone I learned everything I know from my big sis.

Boo-Ya!
(Don't YOU hate me because I'm beautiful and Don't YOU try this at home.)

In Joy
S

Anonymous said...

Yesterday. on FOX it was noted that ME state law prohibits sex with anyone younger than 14 yrs of age, in all circumstances except marriage, so all this s&*t goes before the board again for reconsideration. There is some concern supporters are breaking state law! Ironic that the school board has determined the school nurse can dispense Rx meds without a Dr or the parents knowlege with possibly side effects including allergic reactions - and that's okay! However, if the girl accidentally gets pregnant, it is difficult for her to obtain an abortion without notifying her parents. I sometimes wonder - when our mothers were girls, it was often a stigma against the girl to have a baby out of wedlock. Very little was ever said about the boy other than "boys will be boys", "boys must sow their wild oats". Times change, sexual revolution and all that, but there still seems to be a quiet undercurrent of stigma that MUST be attached to the girl. As long as she is following the state mandated birth control protocol, we stand behind her; once that protocol is compromised or breached (or in some cases, didn't work!), we MUST use her as an example, rights and privacy be damned. Meanwhile boys are hitting it and quitting it, and claiming girls are dumb. Maybe we are! Has it occurred to anyone that the responsibility for not making babies is once again on the (girls') shoulders? Frees up a lot of time for boys to sow wild oats! Wouldn't easily accessible (if not encouraged or coerced) birth control methods also make it easier for pedophiles and perverts to take advantage of young girls with a decreased likelihood of getting caught? Meanwhile, none of this nonsense protects our babies from STDs. What the hell are we doing here, folks? They are just little kids! Lets protect them from peanuts but expose them to penis! WTF!!!!!!!!!!! If childhood pregnancy is such an epidemic in ME, maybe the adults need to take a look at how they might be influencing the situation negatively and change their behavior,actions and attitudes, hmmm?

pass the popcorn, please!