Dude, this entire thread is hinged to the notion there is something objectionable about a 36-year old Republican becoming a grandmother. The subtext is that it was wrong of her to be a teen mom and it wrong of her teenaged son to impregnate his girlfriend. By invoking the word “innocence” as @Smapti did in his first post, he implied immorality has occurred. Of course he could have been using “innocence” sardonically, but it’s still grating, since his usage aligns with the larger subtext that shameful acts have occurred.
Seconded. @YWTF, your interpretation of the posts you quoted is really baffling to me.
HA HA HA HA HA HAAA!!! Oh my, that’s funny. Ma’am, what Boebert thinks is that (unmarried) teen parents in her own ideological tribe shouldn’t be condemned and marginalized.
Her rabid support for Christian-nationalist right-wing beliefs, including her denunciations of “liberal” initiatives like sex ed in schools so that unmarried teens can actually get some factual information about sex, makes her hypocrisy extremely clear. She (and the right-wingers she’s playing to) are all about trumpeting “Christian values” that clearly include condemnation and marginalization of premarital sex as a feature of godless-liberal-permissive American culture that their movement needs to “save” from evil liberalism.
Which, yeah, makes all of them hypocrites, but it doesn’t make Boebert in particular not a hypocrite.
In my world, “innocence” means lack of awareness, being uninformed, being inexperienced. It’s not linked to morality. YMMV (and apparently it does).
I’m sorry but I’m looking for a bit more detail than “everything is hinged to a notion.” Again, could you select an example post where you believe the poster is judging that it’s wrong to be a teen mom and wrong for her son to impregnate his girlfriend? Just pick one and use the [u] tag to underline. Then we can zoom in on the underlined part and dig into the misunderstanding.
“Innocence” is extremely common as a descriptor for children, and usually means “ignorant of sex and sexuality.” Those who use it that way seem to see it as a positive, pure state, as opposed to the sinful adult. They also seem to be utterly unacquainted with actual children, but it’s a common cultural thing.
Unintended pregnancy? I really doubt it. I’d bet the young couple are well aware of the consequences of unprotected sex. And a baby is just the next phase of a relationship. It’s a limited world view that’s acceptable in a lot of families.
Are you… suggesting that the only teenagers who have unintended pregnancies are ones who are literally unaware of the fact that unprotected sex can cause pregnancy?
Because I’m pretty sure you’re wrong about that.
What I’m literally saying is that boeberts kid is well aware and his pregnancy was not unintended.
What’s wrong isn’t that she was a teen mom and her son is going to be a teen dad.
What’s wrong is that in general unplanned teen pregnancies hurt teens’ (especially girls’) future prospects, and that Boebert and the religious right create an environment where unplanned teen pregnancies are more likely through their condemnation of sex education. So her son is now a visible example of the consequences of the policies she promotes.
Meaning that you’re totally guessing about that on the basis of zero actual knowledge of Boebert’s son’s relationship with his girlfriend. Okay, whatever.
Same as you kimstu
I know this and you know this, but there are a lot of people who don’t buy the effectiveness of sex ed and believes it conflicts with their religious values. And they aren’t totally wrong if we taken into account the cultural context needed for sex ed to work.
In conservative communities where premarital sex is stigmatized (especially in girls) but at the same time, being fruitful and multiplying and being “sweet” and not going to college and submitting to one’s husband etc. is also promoted, its questionable what an hour of sex ed during a semester is really going to achieve. There are a lot of cultural influences that would have to be combatted to ensure unwanted pregnancies don’t happen in that kind of environment. I would guess that abortion access, not sex education, is probably the most effective check when the deck is stacked like that.
Teen premarital sex and pregnancy go together in terms of stigma. When girls from traditional backgrounds get pregnant, “she’s a slut” is the monster they fear the most. It’s not “oh she made a mistake with her birth control”. It’s “oh I would’ve never thought she was that type of girl”. Pregnancy is an obvious indicator that a girl is sexually active and therefore “impure”. The attitude is old as dirt and still exists in the present.
Actually, I didn’t speculate at all on the nature of Boebert’s son’s premarital pregnancy. I have no idea whether he and his girlfriend intended to get pregnant or whether it was an accident. Neither do you, factually speaking, but you’re the one declaring an opinion about which it was.
Yet here you are opining about my opinion and taking offense and I don’t really care why you are but okay whatever.
“Innocence” can mean unaware but it more often means guileless and free of sin.
I have to quote Asimov (twice) on this one, because – while I totally understand the points you’re making … well … here’s Isaac:
And it is these ignorant people, the most uneducated, the most unimaginative, the most unthinking among us, who would make themselves the guides and leaders of us all; who would force their feeble and childish beliefs on us; who would invade our schools and libraries and homes. I personally resent it bitterly.
Anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that ‘my ignorance is just as good as your knowledge.’
I haven’t read anything particularly positive about the Dark Ages. I wish they’d honor my preference to opt-out.
WHOA! Two dynamite quotes! And sadly, truer today than ever…
Ok… you’re 100% right. Teen pregnancy is not a moral offense, it is a thing that, in general, harms teens.
It loads young people with still developing minds and bodies, who should be responsible for growing up, with responsibilities far beyond what they should be held responsible for. It hampers their growth, their future education and financial prospects, and puts the welfare of a baby in the hands of children who can barely be trusted with their own personal welfare.
The proud grandmother here, and others of her ilk, are hell bent on making sure this situation is repeated for more children who literally cannot handle it. THAT is the moral failing. Not the teen, the adults who should know better, and don’t.
I understand this too. I could rant all day about how social conservatism and religiosity is pulling us down as a country. Pointing at the chickens coming home to roost for Boebert is like pointing at the chickens coming home to roost for anyone whose cultural programming is leading to expected results.