Jamie Lynn Spears has baby

New mom Jamie and daddy Casey Aldridge and baby Maddie Briann are resting up in McComb, Miss., just across the state line from the Spears’ family home in Kenwood, La.


I don’t know what it means, but she has set an amazing example. Rather than murdering her unborn baby, she made a sacrifice and let it be born. Despite her evil action, God has brought some good out of it (namely the example of rejecting abortion). Babies are not punishment for wrongdoing, they are an undeserved reward. :smiley:

The prayers of many (that she would not abort the child) were answered by God with a yes.

We shouldn’t applaud anyone merely because they resisted the temptation to commit murder. That sort of attitude is nothing more than minimalist morality. What ought to concern us now is the horrific surroundings this poor child will be exposed to. Our prayers ought to be directed towards removing this precious child from a family environment that has already perverted both the child’s mother and aunt.

Jane in Memphis decided not to have an abortion, but I don’t see her on the news.

What I really don’t get is why so many people keep talking bad about Jamie Lynn and how she has “glamorized” teen pregnancy. :confused: The way I see it, she doesn’t have the best parents, she is allowed to make decisions that she has no business making, she made a huge mistake which resulted in her daughter, and she’s taking responsibility for it.

I can’t imagine that it’s easy having to quit your show and take all this negative pressure from the media. Honestly, she’s being held up as a poster child for the Gloucester High stuff, when I honestly think she should be given some kudos for not choosing abortion. She’s really lost a lot through making the right decision:

She’s repeatedly held up by the media as the negative image of teen pregnancy.

She’s going through motherhood at a very young age.

She lost her job.

She’s had a lot of negative publicity.

She moved back home and hasn’t appeared publicly through her pregnancy.

I mean, give her a break. It would have been so much easier for her to have gotten an abortion and get out of all that…but she didn’t. She made the mature decision to deal with everything from her mistakes and I respect her for that. I think she should get at least some support for that. :thumbsup:

Sure, other girls have made the right decision too. But they also haven’t had their situation analyzed by every media outlet throughout their entire pregnancy…or had paparazzi to deal with when trying to leave the hospital. It’s not good attention that she’s had to deal with and I think she deserves some sympathy for that.

Eric, in order to pray that she be removed from her perverted environment, she would have to be alive. I don’t see why applauding someone for not murdering his/her baby is a minimalist morality. There is nothing minimal about resisting temptations to murder. Yes, we do need to get her out of the environment, but it would be better for her to live in the environment for the time being, than to be murdered.


I think she made a courageous decision by the grace of God, and consequently the baby actually has a life.

The mainstream media loves murder. They would have rather her murder the baby than have it. What happened to the Core Democratic Value of Life (the one I learned in elementary school)?

She isn’t on the news because she isn’t a superstar and/or the news organizations don’t care…but that doesn’t surprise me.

…Or perhaps she doesn’t want to be on the news.

God bless your good soul.


Why not assume that she’ll make a great mom and that the guy will make a great father??

It wasn’t that long ago in the history of the USA or any other country that girls routinely got married and had kids in their teens.

Some people have very short memories…and even less education in history


Exactly, the media controls what we see and what we dont’ see.

I would have sued for losing that job.

If we’re going to embrace your ethic properly, let’s travel to the prisons where it is much needed. We can praise the vandal for not also being a thief, the thief for not being a rapist, the rapist for not being a murderer and the murderer for not urinating on his victim’s corpse. There must be thousands of felons who have heretofore lacked the praise you think they justly deserve simply because they are not worse than they are.

The point is that there will always be something worse a sinner could have done. To praise them merely for what might amount to the lack of a diabolical imagination is precisely the minimalist morality I decry. It is, in the end, wholly contemptuous of their human dignity and their ability to act as a moral agent. It is to praise the D student for not getting an F. More importantly, in its necessary assumption of the target’s inherent inability to resist the evil done (which is why we must ignore it) one opens oneself up to the influence of sinful pride, imagining oneself to be so much more a moral paragon being able to resist both the evil the target rejected and the evil succumbed to.

When it comes to another human life, you cannot apply what you have done above. Either the baby is alive or it is dead. If it is dead how can you do any other thing? It is not minimalism to praise her decision to have the baby. When she has it, other moral decisions can be considered, but if she doesn’t have it how can you hope for anything else? Above, you said that she needed to be removed from the perverse environment. How can she be removed if she is dead? What you have done above is created a scale of evils, one being lesser than the other. When it comes to another human life you cannot do that. There is one good and one evil. Ethics vary from one situation to another. You can’t apply one idea to every event. In this event there is no lesser evil. There is one good and one evil. Let us at least rejoice that Jamie Lynn Spears chose the good. At least then we can make decisions from there.

If that’s the case, then any failing short of murder becomes irrelevant. It’s minimalist precisely because it praises people for being just good enough. This is a wholly uncharitable ethic to teach anyone to aspire to since, before God, “good enough” is neither good nor enough.

I’m praising Jamie Lynn Spears’ decision for the sake of the baby. Things don’t just happen, they happen one step at a time. Yes, Jamie Lynn Spears should be a better person. This has little do with being good enough. It’s about the life of a baby. That doesn’t mean she should not aspire to greater holiness. What it means is that the baby can actually have a chance to please God. If the baby is dead, can she even be “good enough”? If she is dead can she even achieve the minimum? If, as you say and I agree with you, someone should achieve the maximum, they do have to be alive first.

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.