Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Young girls can have babies once they start menstruating, which is starting earlier and earlier.
I am wondering if teen pregnancy is "wrong," then is "God" also wrong for designing young girls to be able to conceive at young ages?
Please do not quote scripture, but think about this question, and give a thoughtful response as to why a human being would be designed in a way that would then be frowned upon and difficult to interfere with (as in birth control, abortion, etc.).
It seems like a simple design flaw. If women are not "supposed" to give birth until age 20 say (just picked an arbitrary number), then why would "God" design them capable of having babies at age 10 through teens when they are unable to support themselves, act independently, or have the maturity to parent a child?
Young girls can have babies once they start menstruating, which is starting earlier and earlier.
I am wondering if teen pregnancy is "wrong," then is "God" also wrong for designing young girls to be able to conceive at young ages?
Please do not quote scripture, but think about this question, and give a thoughtful response as to why a human being would be designed in a way that would then be frowned upon and difficult to interfere with (as in birth control, abortion, etc.).
It seems like a simple design flaw. If women are not "supposed" to give birth until age 20 say (just picked an arbitrary number), then why would "God" design them capable of having babies at age 10 through teens when they are unable to support themselves, act independently, or have the maturity to parent a child?
"God" has/had nothing to do with the age of girls' menstruation.
Young girls can have babies once they start menstruating, which is starting earlier and earlier.
I am wondering if teen pregnancy is "wrong," then is "God" also wrong for designing young girls to be able to conceive at young ages?
Please do not quote scripture, but think about this question, and give a thoughtful response as to why a human being would be designed in a way that would then be frowned upon and difficult to interfere with (as in birth control, abortion, etc.).
It seems like a simple design flaw. If women are not "supposed" to give birth until age 20 say (just picked an arbitrary number), then why would "God" design them capable of having babies at age 10 through teens when they are unable to support themselves, act independently, or have the maturity to parent a child?
Good question. Why indeed would the young be designed with the capacity to have so much fun but not be 'allowed' to enjoy it? Of course, to an atheist the answer is simple - we were not designed.
Someone I know has a 13 year old daughter who has become rebellious and is sexually active. Her parents are putting her on the pill! Not sure how they will do that since doctors may not prescribe hormonal birth control to girls under 18 (or so I am told). I'm guessing it's to do with health issues - hormonal interference or something. All of which leads to the big question - why would a designer do that to us? Charge us with raging hormones, make us highly fertile at an early age (I may have one or two offspring out there) - it makes no sense whatever. Mother nature on the other hand ..... well, just count how many of us there are - that would suggest mother nature got it right, but a designer? Not so good.
By the way, OP, you do know of course that there are only two species on earth that enjoy recreational sex. Us humans and our close cousins the bonobos (close in so far as they share something like 98% mitochondrial DNA with us, having had a common ancestor some six million years back).
But you asked; "I am wondering if teen pregnancy is "wrong," then is "God" also wrong for designing young girls to be able to conceive at young ages?" and I would answer, yes, "God" would indeed be wrong. But is it really "wrong" for teenage girls to get pregnant? I would say no it's not wrong but it's not ideal. In fact, it's rather inconvenient.
Obviously, females are meant to begin breeding at a young age. This is, after all, the reason God made them.
That's what you are looking for, right?
Yes, the Bible does support this view. Females are property and should obey first their father, then whatever man her father decides to sell her to in marriage.
To you, this may be evidence that God made females inferior to males. To me, it is evidence that some males made the Bible and every religion which comes from it. This would include making God in their own image, and explains the misogyny of God.
Ive wondered about this myself. I remember hearing on the news, some very young girl, i want to say 11 or maybe even 10 yrs old and she was pregnant with a child from being molested, the first thing i said to myself is "why in the world would a creator God make it physically possible for such a young girl to even get pregnant in the first place"
I don't think biology cares (so to speak), it's quantity v. quality to some extent. For most species, many babies may die, many mothers may die so just get as many pregnancies started as possible.
But with that said, it's kind of interesting to note that many teens don't start menstruating regularly for several years after menarche, and many early periods are anovulatory. Who knows - this may be something of a biological control over the total percentage of very young mothers. Rather, the first few years of periods are more "practice runs" for the body, like erections in boys well before they could possibly get anyone pregnant.
If the question is why would God have young girls have periods of they're not supposed to be ready for motherhood (I think that's the intimation?), I don't know. I mean, why then would God have male babies get erections in the womb? For that matter, why would God allow boys of 13 to get erections and produce sperm and want sex if God doesn't feel 13-year-old boys are prepared for the responsibilities of fatherhood?I
If you feel it is okay for 13-year-old girls to bear children since they physically can, you must also believe 13-year-old boys are ready for becoming fathers since they physically can. Whether or not this means God made a mistake, I can't say. that may be up to each person to come to terms with. I personally see it more biologically. Biologically, the more spaghetti you throw at the wall, the more may stick. Theologically, if physical reproductive ability is indication of readiness, then I'd say if the child Mom is ready to be "a mother" then the child Dad must be ready to be "a father." Unless one believes God only made a mistake with boys.I
So dads...get your 8th grade sons full-time jobs, stat.
FWIW, genetic defects increase in probability when the mother is under 19. Genetic meaning: from the get-go, from an imperfect egg or an error within days of fertilization - not from a teen girl being less likely to take care of herself throughout the pregnancy. So again...it's up to anyone's individual beliefs to decide. A mistake in God's design that such pregnancies could happen anyway?
Young girls can have babies once they start menstruating, which is starting earlier and earlier.
It's starting earlier and earlier at least partially due to synthetic hormones which are omnipresent in our environment. Synthetic estrogen as well others affects both male and female.
Quote:
I am wondering if teen pregnancy is "wrong," then is "God" also wrong for designing young girls to be able to conceive at young ages?
It's certainly wrong in a capitalistic 'concrete jungle' society.
Quote:
Please do not quote scripture, but think about this question, and give a thoughtful response as to why a human being would be designed in a way that would then be frowned upon and difficult to interfere with (as in birth control, abortion, etc.).
Frowned upon by whom? Societies that think breast are fun bags?!
Quote:
It seems like a simple design flaw. If women are not "supposed" to give birth until age 20 say (just picked an arbitrary number), then why would "God" design them capable of having babies at age 10 through teens when they are unable to support themselves, act independently, or have the maturity to parent a child?
It's the same thing with pets. Starting around age 4 months, a lab can have a litter of 11+ with no viable means of support.
The whole premise is silly since it's referring to the artificial standards of today and in countries like ours.
In other times and other places the ages at which people were expected to do or not do something is/was vastly different than our current arbitrary ones.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
