I like the story of that young girl you gave us and agree with the bitterness she faced.
Each of us has a different reality and times made it different.
Philo, please do not see this as God bothering.
Suzeonline told a far more believable story,I too am unimpressed with the dreadful past of Church's in this area.
And never saw a positive outcome in this area from Church's
We say Children can be cruel, see it in every school, so too can adults, needlessly infamously.
My story was not of one accident,it was from a time before the pill, but it happened 7 times,to one mother.
And continues today, a complete understanding is not possible without knowing what can happen .
Each case is different, but we now have more children in care than at anytime in my life.
Right now, in a small country town,over 20 children live in foster care in 5 homes.
We are more excepting, so we should be, but is that the end?
I do think honestly,not every mum is ok with early child birth.
Not every kid is going to get by.
And yes strange for some blokes, but too many romeos never take responsibility for their kids.

In my 70 years of being in Churches I have found they are the ones in the earlier days to have established orpanages [Lutanda, Dalmar etc], adoption agencies, child and family welfare services [Salvation Army etc], established work among neglected and fatherless children [eg Watoto childrens choir, Compassion, World Vision etc] I have personally supported several Compassion children of fatherles parents. I have several female friends in Sydney and outer areas working in the areas of teenage street prostitution to assist these girls find a better life.

I find it is not family people that stigmatize teenage pregnancies it is rather the sterile professional Ms. They call them "breeders", and cless them in the same catogory as rabbits.

I find the problem among young girls is lack of love and emotional security from their fathers; and the disrespect by men for the sacredness of others bodies especially of young women, to whom they make no lifetime committment.

Niccalee:

You might want to look into the following:

I recently read an interesting article where they stated that the new sexual freedom was not always accompanied by responsibility. That the US had a much higher rate of teenage pregnancy and illegitimacy than other Western industrialized nations. And that the US is the only such society where teenage pregnancy - which now involves over a million adolescents a year - is increasing. Apparently - permissiveness alone can't account for the phenomenon, rates of teenage sexual activity are similar in the US to other nations. Nor does the reason lie in welfare benefits for unmarried mothers, as these apparently - are more generous in other countries. Nor are the lower pregnancy rates elsewhere, the result of easier abortions, for the other societies have lower abortion rates than the US. The reason seems to lie in birth control, which is easily and cheaply available to adolescents elsewhere, but apparently is more difficult for American teens to get. Apparently, the other nations are concerned that teenagers not get pregnant, and so encourage sexually active adolescents to use contraceptions. Whereas,the US is concerned that teenagers not have sex, and so discourages their use of contraception on the grounds that it might facilitate sexual activity. So, a combination of old values and new permissiveness leads to pregnancy - and then to abortion or illegitimacy. Interesting - and might be
worthwhile researching.

Niccalee I would like to hear from you again what are your thoughts on the subject.
I am aware generational differences bring different views.
And truly think you have put a very important issue out to air.
Philo, mate my back ground was very much in the church, as a child my family driven by mum went to church.
Is was a different reality in my then very small southern highlands village.
Forced to give up the child many suffer still today,children molested in such homes and while only minority's acted that way we know it happened.
While it is slightly of subject I remain convinced we should do every thing in our power to educate both sex's about early child births, it is in every ones interests to avoid it if possible.

Yes, so accepting, in fact, that it pays the mother for 18 years to raise the child, meeting the material needs of both mother and child. It annoys me that a single woman, as her "right", can decide to have a baby and society (including tax-payers already trying to raise their own kids) picks up the tab!

Why isn't my stay-at-home wife paid the same to look after our children? Why am I supporting my own kids and those of people who have some "right" to my support?

Mothers who have no way to support their offspring should give them up to Government agencies that meet the needs of all these children through institutions set up for the purpose. At least I would know my taxes were definitely being used entirely for the children's welfare. Mothers can have visiting rights and take them back when their circumstances change. This approach may take the shine off the romantic idea that some girls/women have about having a baby without support.

Do you believe that being a mother is a good thing? Then why does
"unwed" in front of it, make it a bad thing? Or is it your tax dollars that you feel are being spent needlessly? Don't fret. Who'll support you in your old age? Possibly the tax dollars of the children of all these "single" women!