Re: I will quote LGsinmyheart on the matter:

How about the lives of those mothers and their children anyway?
Good parenting is already rare when the adults are the ones doing it, and while teens aren't inepts as society makes them seem, they often are victim of bad parenting and awful education themselves so they'd be continuing an vicious cycle.

But that is precisely part of the reason! Current society, partly by accident (the social changes since 1945) and partly by design (the bureaucratization of youth affairs), makes it all the harder for young parents to prosper. More young parents will reverse the trend, by forcing society's hand to consider them, and by having they create alternatives for themselves (two things that not-particularly-young single mothers did a generation ago).

Also, the post you replied to talked about condoms and preservatives, which people use when they DON'T want to have children. Opposing to them would make those girls get pregnant against their own will, as they would have sex for pleasure and wouldn't know how to avoid pregnancy.

But here is where the CDC study comes in handy. Evidence suggests that (1) teenagers are diversifying their sexual activity away from p.i.v. to avoid pregnancy and (2) they think less and less that pregnancy is an unqualified negative to avoid, even if they aren't actively seeking it.

Economically it's also really stupid, as higher education is pretty expensive in many places of the world, and the young mother (and father, if he even cares) probably wouldn't be able to afford both education and paying for their baby's necessities, limiting their earnings in the future, and even worse: limiting their intellectual development.

What Baldur said applies. Higher education is expensive because it is inflated. It doesn't (or at least shouldn't) cost as much as it does almost everywhere. And long degrees don't add so much professional value to people anymore to be worth it - at least not for most people.

Otoh, I half understand the premise, given that pre-university education, almost everywhere in the world, is falling in quality, so for many people the natural instinct is trying to compensate with more university-level education. But, though this problem is real, I don't think that is a solution.

Overpopulation is already an issue,

It isn't. Food production is still increasing without increasing land and water use. Urbanization is still going on, even in developed countries: making it easier to deliver services from water and sanitation to health and education to more people. Both trends will also improve the environmental sustainability of our lifestyles within the next decade. And then, as I said, many countries already are or soon will be losing population, not gaining it.

we don't need to have a lot of people living in awful conditions,

We will not. As a matter of fact, countries with shrinking populations are likely to decrease in all measures of quality of life while countries with increasing populations improve them.

technology will soon replace most workers anyway.

Yes and no. Technology will replace most workers in labour intensive, little value added jobs: ie, the least desirable jobs to have. Knowledge intensive jobs, high value added jobs, specialized jobs, highly qualified jobs, and a lot of the service sector will actually be gaining more jobs than they lose to technology.

You don't really seem to care about "liberating teen sexuality", but rather including them in the same level as adults. Which is plain stupid too, a young person does make a lot of mistakes and needs to learn to become a good parent, sex without live long consequences is a good way for them to learn about relationships, relaxing, while still having the chance of making mistakes.

And again, current societies, part by design, part by accident, intentionally make it more difficult for them to learn. With all the hurdles we put in their way, it's a miracle that some even turn out to be well-adjusted adults at all, never mind good parents!

About 4)... no education at all, making children and teen even more cloistered, just gives them even less possibilities to think for themselves and learn about others.

Not as they are designed now. The hierarchy of headmaster over teacher over student only teaches about assholish authority structures. The compulsory age segregation caused by standardized tests and pre-defined grades makes them less aware of life cycles, specific age concerns, and wary of relating with others not perceived as equal (which, eventually, also has a negative effect on their parental abilities).

Of course educations needs to become better, but for that, an entirely different revolution needs to take place, ideological and economic.

And I think this can be an element of it ;)

There are people who do plan to make a different with their lives, or don't want to become parents, how can it be good to limit someone else's life and sexuality due to such bias? Children do need time to make mistakes, to think and learn, and are often greatly helped by their parents are educators.

I am not limiting anyone: I am talking about social trends, not personal stories. There always are personal stories that run against a social trend, no matter how strong and evident the trend looks for a statistician.

We do need rational and ethical professionals, in every area, who would guide them? Can they even waste their time in changing the world when they should change diapers instead?

Yes they can. Sarah Palin gave birth in a helicopter. OK, some claim the story is apocryphal, and Palin might not be the person you would like as an example. The point is that it is still very well possible.

Of course, there are some people who actually want to become mothers since young age, love babies, and just want a happy life. And it's terrible how some people see that vocation as something unnecesary.

Well, nothing (or nobody) is, as such "necessary". But the more variety there is, the richer the whole human experience is, and the better we all are because of that.