'People' in MY world

I have heard it said many times (although thankfully not to me) that when 'god is displeased with a union between man and his wife, he shows his displeasure by not creating and giving children to that union.'

Now, I have never believed that and nor will I, however, if I ever needed to disprove this statement I need look no further than last weeks People magazine.

People last week posted their biggest ever spread of teenagers who are pregnant. Not famous teenagers (AKA Jamie Lynn Spears) but regular, every day kids who do not have Britney to rely on for financial support.
Of the 6 or so kids picture (ranging from 13-17) I think one is still with the baby's father, and one gave the kid up for adoption. I am ok with being pro- choice for 20+ year olds, but who really thinks we are doing these kids a favor by 'permitting' them to keep their babies when they are still babies themselves and will need to support themselves and their babies for the rest of their lives?

I know this is not going to be a popular post, or one that everyone will agree with. I think however, that sub-fertiles have a hard enough time being confronted with peers being pregnant.. why is it necessary to be confronted now with people at least ten years younger than the majority of us.. especially people who are generally totally unequipped to be parental units.

There is a fine line that can be drawn between what one can and can't say to me. For example, I wouldn't want to think that my family to have to monitor what they do and don't tell me because they know my situation; however, I do not think I need to be confronted with my failure to reproduce in a national magazine with people who are (IMHO) far less able to be good parents than I am.