Thursday, May 19, 2005
CNN reports today that a female high school student in Alabama was banned from her Catholic school graduation because she was pregnant. No name listed in the program, no walking, no robe. The policy seems a bit legalistic, but understandable if you want to take a stand against premarital sex.
But what bothers me is that the guy who impregnated her IS allowed to participate in the graduation ceremony. Aside from the obvious double standard, this sends a message that if you're a high school male and you sleep around, there won't be consequences for your actions. And it downplays the resonsibility a male has over his offspring. This is the reason why there are so many low-life men out there who shirk their familial responsibilities.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
6 comments:
You want to wear my oversize watch? A TAG is a starter watch? Lemme introduce that guy to my McDonald's water wrist watch from 5th grade. Now that's a starter watch. Let me know when you're coming down!
Hey, I wanna visit your place. Did you buy or rent?
huh? those were the most random comments mr. chao
But, in response to the post, that IS wrong, on SO MANY levels. Maybe the young man was allowed to participate in the graduation ceremonies because he gave special favors to the priests of the school?
You're right... allowing the guy who impregnated the girl to attend the graduation may send the very wrong message that it is okay to have sex irresponsibly, just as long as no physical evidence of it.
I think they both should be allowed to graduate with full privileges. While premarital sex is wrong and should be discouraged, it is a separate issue from graduation. Both of these did well to earn their diplomas. It is especially admirable that the girl did not drop out of school entirely. She should be recognized for that at least.
The first paragraph is an interesting perspective on the Catholic school decision, but I wonder if we know the whole story. What if the girl is remorseful and repentant? What if forgiveness would have been a stronger testimony. I can see why they did it and they have every right to but at the same time, I disagree with this decision.
Post a Comment