When Philanthropic Intent becomes Misanthropic Reality
A UNC Greensboro Program has been hailed for misidentifying the problem behind what is misleadingly perceived as female underachievement.
In other words, there is no problem with wanting girls to go through highschool without having children, to attain a fruitful, academic education (not all women, nor men, are cut out for such, a reality of which everyone ought to be aware), not to be burdened by the strains of premature motherhood; but there is a very big problem in identifying the problem with pregnancy. It is sad enough that a material reward is necessary to some as an incentive, though it is understandable in the present state of the world. But the very fact that the emphasis of the program is on remaining free from pregnancy gives license to all sorts of immoral behavior.
How is it that so many social programs which might otherwise be good are so deviously perverted? What message is really being fostered in the lives of these girls? Is the moral context of their actions being reinforced in any way, or are they being prompted on towards a life of materialistic selfishness? A program such as this is based around an action; an action is defined and shaped by its final cause (“that-for-which”); the final cause of this program is an “improvement in quality of life.” Unfortunately, “quality of life” is a term terrifyingly interpreted.
Could not the $100,000 of tax money being spent on the breeding of Wyoming toads perhaps go to reward someone for actually doing something good?