This show is starting to sink into a disturbing trend of having a great over-arching story (Eli and his visions) and enfuriating self-contained stories (namely, the cort cases). After the episode about the soldier of five years who milked the country for money until they asked her to do her job AS a soldier, and she sued for release (see my review here: ), I didn't think this show could piss me off more.
Then they do this show. As soon as they said the girl was in trouble for interrupting a school assembly on abstinence, I knew there was going to be problems. First of all, the girl knew damn well that what she was doing was against the rules. She knew she would get in trouble. She did it anyway. Then she decided to moan about the punishment. That's crap already.
Then they get to court, and the start rambling off these heavy-handed leftist "facts" that are total lies. She starts by talking about how the abstinence assemblies are about "never having sex." Not true. They're about waiting. They're about discouraging teens, who are not only not legally allowed to have sex, but are unready and ill-prepared for the possible consequences, from having sex. Waiting until you're ready is not "never." And I'm sick and tired of people acting like it's impossible to wait, it's impossible to EXPECT anyone to wait, and that's it's just some completely inevitable thing that kids are going to have sex, so you might as well just throw your hands up, toss some rubbers at them and tell them to have a good time. When the hell did people stop having any faith in their kids?
Then they get into the court claims that the seminars teach that contraception doesn't work. Not true. They teach that abstinence is the only contraception that works 100% of the time. That even if you use a condom, it is still possible to get pregnant or catch a STD. And that's true. Then she states that that kids who are in abstinence programs are less likely to use contraception. Bull crap. Totally made up. Then they ask her how she's been affected by the seminars, and she lists here friends who have gotten pregnant, or got STD's. Here's the thing: there were four pregnancies in my graduation class, NONE of whom had ever attended an abstinence course. There were at least three with STD's. Again, no abstinence course. Alright, so her friend got pregnant, and the other one got the clap. That doesn't mean those thing wouldn't have happened had the abstinence assembly not been held.
Then Michaels takes the stand and reiterates what she said. I sometimes wonder if the people writing this crap have ever actually ATTENDED one of the assemblies they so viciously rally against. The point isn't that "condoms don't work." The point is that "condoms can fail" and "abstinence is the ONLY thing that always works." And it's true. Condoms can rip. They can tear. They can leak. It is not only POSSIBLE that they fail, they DO fail. It happens every day. Yes, they are very effective. Yes, the VAST majority of the time, they do their job. But I'm sick of hearing "how can I be pregnant? I don't understand, I used a condom!" or worse, "I should be able to have an abortion because I was responsible and used protection." The problem (and this part is key, so please, pay attention), is that when condoms are the main focus of sex ed, the signal that is sent is "go ahead, have sex, it's fine, don't give it a second thought, just wear a condom, and you'll be fine!" No addressing how much it can change a young person's life. No mention of the drama it tends to bring, but worst of all, it takes away the very real need to consider the very real consequences that are possible every time you have sex, protection or not. Consequences that no one is ready to face in high school.
And that's what it all comes down to: consequences. The girl did something she wasn't supposed to, and when the consequences rolled away, she insisted that she shouldn't have to face them.
And that attitude is exactly why it's so important to teach both abstinence and that condoms can fail.
And the conclusion to this was the most ridiculous one yet. Right or wrong, that document would trump anything. "What they intended" when they entered into a marriage no longer recognized by the state is irrelevant. Think of it this way: when a man and a woman get married, usually, the intention is to spend the rest of their lives together, and to share their lives and everything else equally. But you know what? If the couple sign a prenup? No judge in the freaking world is going to say "well, you do have a clearly legally binding document here, but it's clear that your intentions were to never use it, so I'm going to completely ignore it."
Bull crap. You can talk about right and wrong and gay rights all you want, but the law is simply about right and wrong. A serial child rapist who is acquitted can return to that courtroom ten minutes later and and confess everything, and he still can't be convicted due to jeopardy. He would walk away clean. You know why? Because the law has very specific rules, and good intentions or "the way things 'should' be" do NOT over-rule or supersede said rules. All in all, I like the over-all plot of this show, but the court cases are dipping further and further into the realm of utter bull-crap.
As the case progresses, it reaches a point where it's revealed the boy called 911, and then hung up and ran away. Turns out he has a big bruise on his side where his father hit him. Open and shut, right? The father is abusing his son, he should go with the mother. Case closed.
Not quite. After a number of visions, as well as flashbacks to an incident when his father was having visions (his father had the same aneurism), the truth comes out: the bruises were from a skateboarding accident. The whole thing is a setup, dreamed up by the father so that the mother will get sole custody and thus be discharged because she can't go to Iraq. And her reason for not wanting to go is not that she object to the war, it's that she might get killed, and every day she's over there, the odds of that happening increase.
Alright, so let me get this straight: this woman signs up for military service. A job where the standard uniform comes with a fully automatic assault rifle, and the standard training includes how to use it to kill people. She then accepts money that people have paid out of their pay checks for working one weekend a month. She does this for six straight years, getting benefits, possibly college tuition assistance, the whole nine yards, and the entire time, and then, after six years, she's called on to actually fulfill the duty of a soldier, the reason the job even EXISTS: to FIGHT. And suddenly, she wants out. She wants out, and she's willing to let her husband go to PRISON for child abuse, all so that she doesn't have to the job she signed up and drained the country's resources for.
Bull crap. That is a royal slap in the face of everyone who serves. You're afraid of fighting? Of getting killed? Fine. That's understandable. So afraid you can't go? Again, that's understandable. Some people just aren't meant to be warriors. But you know what? If anything about war is unacceptable to you, you have no business being a soldier, and you damn sure have no business doing it for six years.
And in case you're wondering how I know she'd been doing it for six years, admittedly, I don't. But I'm giving her the benefit of a doubt. The alternative is that this woman signed up for military service after the war in Iraq had already started. She signed up for the military during a time of war, and then had her husband sent to jail for child abuse so that she didn't have to fight in said war. I don't really see that as better.
The fact that Eli still plead her case and won kind of paints her in a sympathetic light. The whole thing just made me sick.
