[Salvanas]

that a big jump of assumptions.

First I deal with "we know who your going to be when your older...." what definitive proof do you have that says that a person (I'm not talking generalizations here) will turn out to be a "bad" person?

Don't we have a saying that ones actions are there own not there FAULT? Point sorry if you had a bad upbringing but that thing you stole/murdered/ whatnot is still something you choose to do. It brings me to a movie I seen recently Midia goes to jail, There was a part where this women kept saying "you don't know what my dad did". Guess what Midia did, she told her to shut up and take responsibility (I'm putting it in polite terms).

Which leads me into another stark contrast to this, and the very reason why I used him first. Obama, stands in against this. He is the United States President, one of the very most powerful positions in the world. Guess what he had a horrible child life.

Psychological studies are at best subjective because we cannot truly test any situation (people are not lab rats, human rights you get the picture), only guess. ALSO people don't stay the same as they age.

FuturePundit: Humans Most Violent When Only 2 Years Old
How Children Become Violent - Understanding Violent Behavior In Children - Violent Kids: Warning Signs | Women's Magazine

I'm sorry. Did you miss the place where I said 'Usually'? Because if you had read it, you wouldn't of had to type out something that I already know.

I wonder where you got the line "your post is invalid..." On that NO one brought religion into the debate only the mods said not to continue along the lines of the abortion part (to them I'm sorry that I jumped the bought like that, I just got rubbed the wrong way by some posts).

Your post was invalid, because you tried to state that I thought the "ideal" mother was someone in an upper class society. And you still haven't addressed that.

The religion comment was not aimed at you. But aimed at everyone in general.

There is a very good reason why I took the liberty to say such a thing (read the third paragraph and you will make a connection between the question). Now you used the word "satisfying", you understand that that such a life very from person to person. Thus having no definitive answer. BECAUSE of that, one can make any assumption as to what you mean, and by that one could also conclude that any body that's not born to idea situation just isn't worth living.

If the mother is not ready for it, and the baby will grow up in a bad environment, I don't see why it should be brought into the world in order to suffer.

You see. Whatever you say, a teenage mother will NEVER be an ideal mother. Never. I can understand your point if the mother was at an optimum age, but we're talking about teenage pregnancies.

This idea mother, would be good, but that doesn't always happen, NOT at the fault of the child. Ideal situations are nice, but do they rarely occur, especially when someone takes a risk that could bring a unexpected result? the point here, is that you cannot put the blame on someone because of someone actions. One point also to point out, this is generally agreed upon, but still remains in the realm of being subjective (one reason being people of the past had children when there where much younger, had no high school, and could be considered a child).

In the past, we thought Mercury was safe to handle too. In the past the death rate was high, and the age at which people died at, were younger than we have today.

My point, life changes.

This also brings me to my last point, PERSONAL responsibility. You commit the act of sex, you make a agreement that you could have a child. Why, you might ask, simple it's a part to the act (might be a weird analogy, but follow it; you put something in your mouth, you know you might swallow it regardless of how careful you are right apply it here). One thing to notice is NO, contraceptive is 100% fool proof (well unless you consider abstinence but that not the debate here). Teenagers must understand the implications of having sex, and the more that it is hit home that you might/will/can whatever have a child the more they take action against such a event.

This doesn't change the fact that they're still unfit to be mothers at such a young age.

What I get from you, is that even if you know that this baby was going to suffer throughout it's life, you would still encourage it to be born in order for it to be some sort of "lesson" to the mother.

I find that wrong. She'll understand her mistake when she has to kill the baby inside her womb. Kill one life, and you can save anothers. If the mother is not ready for it, why would you let her throw her life away, when we have the resources to save her life. She'll learn either way that it was a bad choice.