School policy forces students to take pregnancy tests, bans pregnant teens[W:150]

dontworrybehappy · Aug 8, 2012

Re: School policy forces students to take pregnancy tests, bans pregnant teens

VanceMack said:
They arent preventing or ceasing the education of pregnant teenagers. They are ensuring the student body does not see teen pregnancy as an acceptable and has become the case in many places DESIRED state. They are a school working to make a difference. You are...not. You bleat about 'rights' but dont truly give a **** about any of them. You didnt care about them before this became a news story and you wont care about them after its over. You dont care about their living circumstances, their employment and education opportunities or their future. You care about one thing...this ideological concept called a 'right'. Once this is resolved you will never give these people a second thought. meanwhile...the school and its administrators and staff will still be right there working to make a difference and you will move on to the next celeb cause du joir.

And if we look back in his posting history, will we see him fighting equally for the "right" to keep and bear arms? Me thinks not.

Kreton · Aug 8, 2012

Re: School policy forces students to take pregnancy tests, bans pregnant teens

Zyphlin said:
Hadn't suggested it did. Not sure how that relates...

Can a pregnant child not get on a bus or a parents car and ride to school? If this was the actual worry, why would it not be that there is an OPTION to undertake classes at home instead of at school rather than it being mandatory? Or even perhaps have it be something that occurs IF attendance issues begin to show, not simply assuming they will.

So the basis for disallowing an individual to continue to attend in-class room education is because it is automatically assumed they will be a distraction if pregnant...even at points where it would not be known to anyone else if not for a pregnancy test?

Do they refuse to allow any kid that tells jokes from attending in-class room education because class clowsn are a distraction and we can just assume if one tells jokes that they'll likely fool around during class? What other "distractoins" have this similar reaction from the school PRIOR to the actual distraction occuring? If there's no such things, it's not really a legitimate argument.

*COULD*. Know what else *COULD*? Not allowing her to participate in actual in-class education. And there are many things that could potentially negative effect the education of those around them...are there other such legal things that an individual is punished for prior to actually causing negative effects at the school? If not, then again...this doesn't seem like it can be the reasoning or if it is, it's still standing out as potential wrongful discrimination due to the extremely unequal application of the standard.

You'd need to present me an analogy where there's similar discrimination occuring in terms of unequal application of the law to a protected class under the EPC for me to be able to ansewr you.

Now, if say...they had a rule that BOYS involved in breaking the law could not attend school because of hte potential adverse effect on education it has, but girls who broke the law could...then yeah, I'd definitely have an issue.

But just in a general sense, if getting public funding, unless the violation was actually on school grounds or during school hours, the simple fact that the kid is possibly going to have to go on trial for a crime isn't something I think they should probably get suspended for. But I can't speak to the constitutionality of that becaues it's not nearly as clear cut as an incident in this case where the application of the standard clearly singles out a particular race/sex/religion/etc.

As to your emotional plea at the end about my "teenage son or daughter", sorry...that's irrelevant to me. We're not talking about if it's understandable that someone wants this rule, we're talking about if it's legal. I reject it when the right plays the Lovejoy "WON'T SOMEONE THINK OF THE CHILDREN" card and I reject it when the Left plays the "WE SHOULD DO IT BECUASE ITS 'GOOD'" argument. We have a system of government of laws and attempting to contort, ignore, or add to the laws based singularly on a notion of what's "good" or what we'd personally want for our own desires is unwise and has largely contributed to the troubles this country has current imho.

I have no issue in theory with a policy that attempts to create further tangable, immediete, consequences for something like sex or pregnancy as a teenager due to the limited ability kids and teens tend to have to be able to truly look at and grasp the severity of the long term effects of those things and thus SHORT term consequences could potentially be beneficial. At the same time however, such things need to be lawful and constitutional because if they are not...even if they may be a good idea in and of themselves...it establishes legal precedence for incidents that you may not like so much.

This is a school taking public funding putting forward a rule in which whatever motivation they have for it, it would appear to be an unequal application of that principle, and one in which an unquestionably disproportionate portion of a protected class (in this case gender) appears to be singled out for action. That's problematic under the law and to the precedence it sets constitutionally.

All of that would be more appliciable if the school were saying that the child was expelled or could never attend. That child made a choice that makes educating them near impossible. The next year the child is likely physically able to meet their standards and seemingly is welcomed back. It makes sense that the school not want to expend additional resources on a child who's choices put them in that position.

We have a system of government of laws and attempting to contort, ignore, or add to the laws based singularly on a notion of what's "good" or what we'd personally want for our own desires is unwise and has largely contributed to the troubles this country has current imho.

I am thinking that title IX that people keep referring to does just that. This school has a policy in place and it is known to students. If you do X then Y will happen as a consequence. The student did X. To be upset about the pre established consequence post X seems rediculous.

Zyphlin · Aug 8, 2012

Re: School policy forces students to take pregnancy tests, bans pregnant teens

mertex said:
I'm surprised that Republican/conservatives would side with the school, since most conservatives claim to be so conscientious of the Constitution.

It's because in reality conservatives are almost as segmented within the over all umbrella of the Republican label as Democrats are. The difference being often Democrats are segmented along "policy/cause" type segments (anti-war, pro-safety net, environmentalism, etc) where as Republicans it's often very much along the various ideological pillars (Social, Fiscal, Government, and Defense).

What you generally see in terms of most of the Republicans/Conservatives defending the school are typically individuals that fit one of these roles:

1. Those that favor Social Conservative at a far higher degree than Governmental Conservatism...meaning in instances where governmental principles of the constitution come to class against their social views, they'll typcially side with the social side and find ways to explain away their break from what would normally be their view governmentally.

2. Those who are not founded so much on principle but rather party/idoelogical identification, and as such are taking stances less with a concern with ideological consistency but based on what it would appear to them the parties/movements platform on the issue would currently be within a vacuum

3. Possibly those who are so extreme in the Governmental Pillar when it comes to limited government that they essentially disavow the notion of the EPC and corresponding law built off it and are primarily focused, to the exclusion of balancing for any other pillars or princpiles, on keeping the government away from choices made on a very localized level.

Zyphlin · Aug 8, 2012

Re: School policy forces students to take pregnancy tests, bans pregnant teens

muciti said:
All of that would be more appliciable if the school were saying that the child was expelled or could never attend.

Unless the argument can be made that the education at home is just as good, if not better, than what they'd get at school then they're being punished by having a reduction in educatoin. And frankly, if our education can function just as well, or better, without a school or face to face time with a teacher then why do we even still have that as a model?

That child made a choice that makes educating them near impossible.

And potentially another child ALSO made the choice that made educating another student near impossible...yet there is no effort what so ever to determine that fact, thus showing the one sided uneven distribution of the principle.

Furthermore, you're making an assumption that educating them will be "near impossible" based off.....what? Obviously not what they're ACTUALLY doing because the school is sending them home prior to them even beginning to see if there will be such an issue.

The next year the child is likely physically able to meet their standards and seemingly is welcomed back.

What "standards" physically would not be met?

It makes sense that the school not want to expend additional resources on a child who's choices put them in that position.

What additional resources would be needed?

And again, you're ignoring the fact that the "choice" to put the child in such a position was not made singularly by that child but potentially to another student. The school has no issues forcing one child to undergo questionably privacy infringing action to find out the information, but seems to have no effort what so ever to find out about the other person involved in the "choice".

I am thinking that title IX that people keep referring to does just that.

Title 9 sets out specifics as to how the law functions in accordance with the constitutional provision of Equal Protectoin under the law.

This school has a policy in place and it is known to students. If you do X then Y will happen as a consequence. The student did X. To be upset about the pre established consequence post X seems rediculous.

However, the policy targets only targets X when it's done by a female, not when it's done by a male. Unless there's a good reason why it's somehow incumbant upon an organization taking state money, and thus subject to similar laws as binds other state entities, that either the physical appearance and nature of BEING pregnant is the punishable thing, in which case what is your basis for said punishment....OR....the punishment is for having underage sex and you're looking to discourage that, in which case you're discriminating against a protected class by seeking to punish, or seeking out to a significantly greater degree to punish, females.

Since no one's answered it when I've asked before...I'll say again...

Can a woman become pregnant without a man in some fashion?

Kreton · Aug 8, 2012

Re: School policy forces students to take pregnancy tests, bans pregnant teens

Zyphlin said:
Unless the argument can be made that the education at home is just as good, if not better, than what they'd get at school then they're being punished by having a reduction in educatoin.

Its not reduction, more of a delay.

And frankly, if our education can function just as well, or better, without a school or face to face time with a teacher then why do we even still have that as a model?

I think home and online learning can be just as good and for some people better as far as book smarts and learning. However there is a social aspect of school that is important to development as well.

And potentially another child ALSO made the choice that made educating another student near impossible...yet there is no effort what so ever to determine that fact, thus showing the one sided uneven distribution of the principle.

That child isnt going to missing school for sickness, cramps, and other pregnancy related things. Dr appts, giving birth recovery, ect. or not to the same extent.

What "standards" physically would not be met?

Physically being there.

What additional resources would be needed?

And again, you're ignoring the fact that the "choice" to put the child in such a position was not made singularly by that child but potentially to another student. The school has no issues forcing one child to undergo questionably privacy infringing action to find out the information, but seems to have no effort what so ever to find out about the other person involved in the "choice".

interupting classes, partnered projects, additional accomodations, heightened risks.

Title 9 sets out specifics as to how the law functions in accordance with the constitutional provision of Equal Protectoin under the law.

As I said before, discrimination should be you being treated differently because of something beyond your control. Pregnancy is within a persons control.

However, the policy targets only targets X when it's done by a female, not when it's done by a male.

They are not targeting sex. They are targeting pregnancy which is not possible for a man.

Can a woman become pregnant without a man in some fashion?

Yes, but I dont believe it to be happening at the high school level.

Hicup · Aug 8, 2012

Re: School policy forces students to take pregnancy tests, bans pregnant teens

Hatuey said:
What? You're being nonsensical at best. The state issuing charters does not give the school the ability to violate the basic constitutional rights of students.

Students lose many constitutional rights in public schools, one that comes to mind is freedom of speech. I believe the rationale is disruptive. I imagine a teenager walking around with a big fat belly would be disruptive, or at least used as a rationale for what constitutes disruption.

Tim-

Caine · Aug 8, 2012

Re: School policy forces students to take pregnancy tests, bans pregnant teens

Kandahar said:
And of course, you will swear up and down that there is nothing remotely racist in that comment. :roll:

I quote some **** I heard on Maury and Im called a racist.... By a liberal.... go figure.... :roll:

Why does it matter if she knows the person anyway? The school's policy is to kick out anyone who is pregnant.

Don't ask me... im not the one who brought it up, just responded to it.... Go attack the source of those comments. Thanks. I'd figure you've been around long enough to know how this works. Reckon I was wrong.

Expelling women from school for being pregnant *is* sexism. You can "ask her to be responsible" all you want, but you can't deny her an education. That's the kind of **** the Taliban do.

Nobody is expelling her from the entire school system. Just the special CHARTER school. See... As a student (or parent of a student) you have to APPLY to go to a Charter School (unless its the type of Charter school for the **** up worthless do nothings one step away from Juvenile Detention then Prison... you know, the ones who are going to rob you in 3 months). If you can't act responsibly, they will replace you with someone who will. I have no problem with that. Nobody is being DENIED an education. They are being kicked out of the CHARTER School. There is even a home study program they can do. And I imagine, the student can always go back to the regular ass school that they were previously assigned by district/location/etc.

Caine · Aug 8, 2012

Re: School policy forces students to take pregnancy tests, bans pregnant teens

Kandahar said:
Creating a separate program for pregnant mothers is fine if the student volunteers to participate. But the school cannot force the student to participate; that's a violation of Title IX.

Teen pregnancy has enough consequences as it is without assholes intentionally making it much harder by preventing the mother from going to school.

Ahem... They weren't forced to ask for special charter school assignment... *cough cough cough*.

Caine · Aug 8, 2012

Re: School policy forces students to take pregnancy tests, bans pregnant teens

Kandahar said:
If it has a disparate impact on women, then it's still gender discrimination. In any case, Title IX specifically outlaws discrimination based on pregnancy too.

34 C.F.R. Part 106

So according to this its wrong for a school to deny a pregnant female a spot on the volleyball team due to her pregnancy?

Obviously, there are some things that don't fall under this.....

Karl · Aug 8, 2012

Re: School policy forces students to take pregnancy tests, bans pregnant teens

ttwtt78640 said:
If the pregnant student will miss time from the classes, and thus likely fail anyway, then what is the harm? [...]

Since people will eventually die anyway, what is the harm in killing them prematurely?

Ya know, I can kinda see how this right wing logic thing works :2razz:

Caine · Aug 8, 2012

Re: School policy forces students to take pregnancy tests, bans pregnant teens

E-M said:
I tried to post this last night but my internet decided it wasn't going to work anymore.

GPS_Flex simply said that if a girl didn't know who she had sex with she shouldn't be in a charter school. I can't find the statistics on this but I can't imagine juvenile sex between 100% strangers, who never share their identities, is consensual anywhere close to 99% of the time. Most cases I know of where a girl has absolutely no idea who she had sex with it was a result of some sort of rape drug. In that case a girl doesn't need to be a stranger of her rapist to not know who she was raped by. So that little statistic of yours means absolutely nothing.

But that is also because it isn't a statics at all, it is a complete lie. Rapes among juveniles are committed by complete strangers 7% of the time (of course you weren't talking about juvenile rape specifically, and the average rate of rape by strangers is 33%). For a crime as serious as rape 7% can not be treated as a bizarre outlier, it is a relevant statistic. Especially considering 44% of all sexual assault is among juveniles, the demographic we are mainly talking about.

Statistics | RAINN | Rape, Abuse and Incest National Network

Facts and logic aren't on your side.

I doubt there is a massive portion of girls who have no idea who they had sex with because they just didn't care to know. That goes completely against the prevailing sociological data on the sexual attitudes and tendencies of girls. Males are much more likely to be having casual sex and are obviously almost exclusively the ones raping people (I'm not saying those two are connected). Thus while males are the ones primarily pushing for sex without attachments they are the ones who are not being burdened. One would think the physical stress of pregnancy would be enough, but now we are throwing girls the stress of loosing their education.

So the group that is, by all measures, least responsible is the only one being punished for irresponsibility. It absolutely is sexism to look at girls who are still minors and expect them to shoulder the entire burden for the consensual and non-consensual sexual activity that occurs around them. It is absolutely sexism when we go looking for new reasons to punish them, especially when we aren't even trying to find the fathers (who also might be able to threaten girls into silence).

Ignoring facts and logic to exclusively blame women for things men are more responsible for is basically the definition of sexism.

Wow. Its obvious you missed the whole point of GPS_Flex's post.

He was talking about tramps who don't know who the baby's father is because they have slept with 6 or 7 different guys within the appropriate period of time to allow pregnancy.

Of course, when such a topic is brought up... the first thing the hand-wringers start crying about is WHAT ABOUT RAPE !! RAPE!! Because that happens so ****ing often :roll:

Bringing up rape as the defense to irresponsibility is tossing the issue of irresponsibility aside because nobody wants to face the fact that teens and even adults are WAYYYY to irresponsible about sex.... in fact, irresponsible sex is culturally encouraged unfortunately.

rathi · Aug 8, 2012

Re: School policy forces students to take pregnancy tests, bans pregnant teens

Caine said:
So according to this its wrong for a school to deny a pregnant female a spot on the volleyball team due to her pregnancy?

Obviously, there are some things that don't fall under this.....

Federal courts have specifically ruled against barring pregnant girls from sports team unless it is medically dangerous to the mother or child.

Karl · Aug 8, 2012

Re: School policy forces students to take pregnancy tests, bans pregnant teens

Caine said:
Nobody is expelling her from the entire school system. Just the special CHARTER school. [...]

Ah. Then I can safely presume that you disagree with SCOTUS in Brown v. Board of Education?

Caine · Aug 8, 2012

Re: School policy forces students to take pregnancy tests, bans pregnant teens

mertex said:
Leave it to Louisiana to find a way to dumb down their own citizens. Instead of providing classes that teach sex education to prevent unwanted pregnancies, they are taking the opposite approach, make them even dumber. I'm surprised that Republican/conservatives would side with the school, since most conservatives claim to be so conscientious of the Constitution. I guess only when it pertains to their own views, eh? I bet if Bristol Palin had been kicked out of school for being pregnant, they would be singing a different tune.

The policy’s complete disregard for Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972, the federal law that prohibits sex discrimination in federally funded education programs and activities, is astonishing. Title IX and its regulations explicitly mandate that schools cannot exclude any student from an education program or activity, “including any class or extracurricular activity, on the basis of such student’s pregnancy, childbirth, false pregnancy, termination of pregnancy or recovery therefrom.”
Besides violating Title IX, the policy is also in violation of the Constitution’s due process right to procreate, and equal protection: it treats female students differently from male students and relies on archaic stereotypes linked to sex and pregnancy.
Approximately 70 percent of teen girls who give birth leave school, due in part to illegal discrimination. Schools should be supporting pregnant and parenting teens that face numerous barriers to completing their education, not illegally excluding them from school. The ACLU’s Women’s Rights Project protects the rights of pregnant and parenting teens through advocacy, education, and litigation, working to combat the push-out of pregnant and parenting teens from school.

Im sorry, was their curriculum posted somewhere where it shows they don't bother with sex education? I might have missed that, please point it out to me if I did.

Thanks for your help.......

Caine · Aug 8, 2012

Re: School policy forces students to take pregnancy tests, bans pregnant teens

rathi said:
Federal courts have specifically ruled against barring pregnant girls from sports team unless it is medically dangerous to the mother or child.

And that is ****ing retarded.

But then again..... you DID say FEDERAL Courts after all.......

Caine · Aug 8, 2012

Re: School policy forces students to take pregnancy tests, bans pregnant teens

Karl said:
Ah. Then I can safely presume that you disagree with SCOTUS in Brown v. Board of Education?

I fail to see the correlation.........

rathi · Aug 8, 2012

Re: School policy forces students to take pregnancy tests, bans pregnant teens

Caine said:
Wow. Its obvious you missed the whole point of GPS_Flex's post.

He was talking about tramps who don't know who the baby's father is because they have slept with 6 or 7 different guys within the appropriate period of time to allow pregnancy.

Of course, when such a topic is brought up... the first thing the hand-wringers start crying about is WHAT ABOUT RAPE !! RAPE!! Because that happens so ****ing often :roll:

Bringing up rape as the defense to irresponsibility is tossing the issue of irresponsibility aside because nobody wants to face the fact that teens and even adults are WAYYYY to irresponsible about sex.... in fact, irresponsible sex is culturally encouraged unfortunately.

So you think okay if a few rape victims get hurt as long as you are able to punish the tramps who sleep around? You are a perfect reminder of why title IX exists, because its the only thing standing between the most vulnerable members of society and people like you.

Kandahar · Aug 8, 2012

Re: School policy forces students to take pregnancy tests, bans pregnant teens

Caine said:
Ahem... They weren't forced to ask for special charter school assignment... *cough cough cough*.

Irrelevant. Title IX specifically says you can't assign a student to a different program based on their pregnancy unless they volunteer for it:

(b) Pregnancy and related conditions. (1) A recipient shall not discriminate against any student, or exclude any student from its education program or activity, including any class or extracurricular activity, on the basis of such student's pregnancy, childbirth, false pregnancy, termination of pregnancy or recovery therefrom, unless the student requests voluntarily to participate in a separate portion of the program or activity of the recipient.

So according to this its wrong for a school to deny a pregnant female a spot on the volleyball team due to her pregnancy?

Obviously, there are some things that don't fall under this.....

The text of the law isn't very ambiguous about it: Schools can't exclude students from extracurricular activities based on pregnancy.

Kandahar · Aug 8, 2012

Re: School policy forces students to take pregnancy tests, bans pregnant teens

Caine said:
Wow. Its obvious you missed the whole point of GPS_Flex's post.

He was talking about tramps who don't know who the baby's father is because they have slept with 6 or 7 different guys within the appropriate period of time to allow pregnancy.

Of course, when such a topic is brought up... the first thing the hand-wringers start crying about is WHAT ABOUT RAPE !! RAPE!! Because that happens so ****ing often :roll:

Are you really a ****ing police officer? You disgust me.

Zyphlin · Aug 8, 2012

Re: School policy forces students to take pregnancy tests, bans pregnant teens

muciti said:
Its not reduction, more of a delay.

Delay is still a sort of reduction.

I think home and online learning can be just as good and for some people better as far as book smarts and learning. However there is a social aspect of school that is important to development as well.

Agree on the social aspect.

That child isnt going to missing school for sickness, cramps, and other pregnancy related things. Dr appts, giving birth recovery, ect. or not to the same extent.

Kids that get cancer would be missing a lot of schools as well. If the justification is "they'll probably miss a lot of school" why would it not apply there as well?

Additionally...would they NOT miss the school classes at home due to sickness, cramps, other pregnancy related things potentially? If they're not healthy enough to go to school, do you think they'll be doing the work at home?

Physically being there.

Great, we should ban cancer patients from attending school as well until they're in full remission.

interupting classes, partnered projects, additional accomodations, heightened risks.

Again...interupting class is an assumption. Inability to do partnered projects is an assumption and isn't more "resources", what "heightend risks" and how does that apply to resources?

As I said before, discrimination should be you being treated differently because of something beyond your control. Pregnancy is within a persons control.

And in this case it is.

A girl and a boy caused a pregnancy.

The girl is being searched out and punished.

There's no search or action towards the boy what so ever.

Being female is not a choice.

They are not targeting sex. They are targeting pregnancy which is not possible for a man.

Since we seem to be functioning off the notion that the school is trying to promote negative consequences for an action they deem bad...

So sex that causes pregnancy....that's fine. But actually BEING pregnant...THAT needs to be punished.

**** all you want kids, especially you boys, because there's no consequences for you. But you female, if you actually get pregnant, YOU'RE going to get punished. The guy that was just as instrumental in knocking you up....he doesn't have a baby in his belly so hey, high five kid, no problems for you!

Yes, but I dont believe it to be happening at the high school level.

So you think teenagers in high school that get pregnant are all getting it from over aged individuals? Is that what you're saying? So instead of unequally applying even handed punishment of this to two school aged kids, they're actually just punishing the girl for being technically raped under the law under your reasoning while still not caring to try and gain knowledge of who the guy is? That's BETTER?

Zyphlin · Aug 8, 2012

Re: School policy forces students to take pregnancy tests, bans pregnant teens

Hicup said:
Students lose many constitutional rights in public schools, one that comes to mind is freedom of speech. I believe the rationale is disruptive. I imagine a teenager walking around with a big fat belly would be disruptive, or at least used as a rationale for what constitutes disruption.

Tim-

Dyed hair can be a distraction...shall we ban kids who come to school with that. What about Goth Clothes...that can be a distraction too. Wearing letterman jackets on game day can cause distraction as kids focus on the game instead. Your basis for violating constitutional law is that it's causing a disruption, yet with how inconsistent that standard would be it hardly seems like a legitimate reasoning.

Again. The question is this. WHAT is the issue here? Are you trying to discourage underage sex? Are you trying to discourage teen pregnancy? Or are you trying to literally discourage the PHYSICAL STATE of Pregnancy?

Zyphlin · Aug 8, 2012

Re: School policy forces students to take pregnancy tests, bans pregnant teens

Caine said:
Bringing up rape as the defense to irresponsibility is tossing the issue of irresponsibility aside because nobody wants to face the fact that teens and even adults are WAYYYY to irresponsible about sex.

So the guy tagging a girl in high school that would have slept with 7 or 8 guys in such a time span, and doing so without a condom, isn't acting irresponsible also? Because this rule doesn't seem to do a damn thing to discourage them. Actually, it seems like it rewards them "Hey, if you **** a girl and she gets knocked up you don't have to worry about her being clingy at school due to it because the school will just boot her out. SCORE!"

Mathematician · Aug 8, 2012

Re: School policy forces students to take pregnancy tests, bans pregnant teens

Kandahar said:
Are you really a ****ing police officer? You disgust me.

You disgust me by supporting the "right" to be irresponsible and a burden to others. Who needs a sex ed class to know the female body carries the child? "Mommy, where do babies come from?" Better yet, what kind of parent doesn't warn their teenage daughter about the consequences of unplanned pregnancy? I have no problem with punishing the father by making them do the home study together to avoid having a school pimp with 3 kids. This should serve as a deterrent, as well as reduce distractions and negative examples within the school.

I would have volunteered for police service if I wasn't afraid of getting charged with use of excessive force against POS people.

Zyphlin · Aug 8, 2012

Re: School policy forces students to take pregnancy tests, bans pregnant teens

Caine said:
Because that happens so ****ing often :roll:

Just about an estimated 80,000 to 100,000 times a year. About 1 in every 1500 women each year. While perhaps not gigantic, to give it some reference....

That's about 6 times the number of murders in the U.S. That's about 9 times more deaths due to drunk driving, and 3 times the number of people killed in auto accidents each year.

Redress · Aug 8, 2012

Re: School policy forces students to take pregnancy tests, bans pregnant teens

Moderator's Warning:

Need to tone it way down guys. If you do not like some one's comments, debate it, don't call them names or tell us how you feel about them.

School policy forces students to take pregnancy tests, bans pregnant teens[W:150]

dontworrybehappy

Kreton

Doesn't know

Zyphlin

Zyphlin

Kreton

Doesn't know

Hicup

Caine

Caine

Caine

Karl

Caine

rathi

Count Smackula

Karl

Caine

Caine

Caine

rathi

Count Smackula

Kandahar

Enemy Combatant

Kandahar

Enemy Combatant

Zyphlin

Zyphlin

Zyphlin

Mathematician

Zyphlin

Redress

Liberal Fascist For Life!