kurokawa-sumire
(?)Community Member
Dedicated Genius
Offline
- Report Post
- Posted: Sat, 02 Aug 2014 00:41:17 +0000
Nymph of Life
B4T
Nymph of Life
Marc John Paul says
Statements in italics were mine, all others credited to Marc John Paul, who brings forth one of the better arguments against abortion I've seen.
While I disagree with 2/3rds of the arguments he's made (increased breast cancer risk, depression) this one point is in fact well thought out. The abortion industry has made it a point to make adoption seem like a more monstrous path then killing a baby, and sadly, it's been effective enough that abortion is currently legal. How about that, a legal method of murdering a child.... In any case, the abortion industry, and pro-choicers will point out that adoption is a system full of child abuse, unwanted babies who are never adopted, and filthy conditions that make prisons seem pleasant.
I won't argue about that, the current adoption system is a mess, and needs reforms, however, it's no excuse to kill a baby at any stage in it's development. The argument I see most often is an argument of the potential of a bad life for the baby to be. Pro-Choicers, seriously, a potential argument? The argument that a baby may be the next Einstein is also a potential argument, and it gets shot down, usually by the claim that the baby could be the next Hitler. So why use potential in this case? Chances are equally great that the child to be will have an amazing life due to adoption. So, let's drop the potential bit aside.
Personally, I believe the adoption process should be made easier, smoother, and more accessible. People should be able to complete the adoption process in a matter of days, rather than the months, sometimes years that it takes. That more than anything, is why some children go unadopted.
So, discuss the flaws in adoption, and how we can correct them so that the evils of abortion can be eliminated.
Quote:
With all the talk about abortion being empowerment to women, I can't help but wonder about a group that is never mentioned in the discussion. The only women we ever talk about are those who want to kill their babies. There are other women in existence! And no, I’m not talking about the fact that most children aborted are girls, though it is an interesting question to ask: When, exactly, do women’s rights begin? I’m talking about mothers who want to adopt! A 2008 study by National Center for Health Statistics found that 33.1% of women have at some point considered adoption. Of that number 4.9% were currently seeking adoptions. That’s 901,000 women looking for babies. By most recent statistics, there are approximately 129,000 children seeking adoption. Now I’m no mathematician, but that’s 772,000 women who want to adopt a child, but will not. It seems that if we killed less of our children, this would not be a problem. Shoot, even if we take the women who were currently seeking adoptions AND had already begun taking steps – 560,000 – there aren’t enough children to go around.
It seems obvious that between hurting one woman and helping two, the most pro-woman action one could take would be to counsel a woman to consider adoption. The most pro-woman action one might take would be to rapidly reduce abortions in America, and thereby increase adoptions.
Though I understand why there exists the rather insane idea that the better choice for all women would be an abortion: Abortion brings in cash. Who is going to pay for all those Planned Parenthood ‘don’t-defund-us’ campaigns if everyone’s putting their children up for adoption?
It seems obvious that between hurting one woman and helping two, the most pro-woman action one could take would be to counsel a woman to consider adoption. The most pro-woman action one might take would be to rapidly reduce abortions in America, and thereby increase adoptions.
Though I understand why there exists the rather insane idea that the better choice for all women would be an abortion: Abortion brings in cash. Who is going to pay for all those Planned Parenthood ‘don’t-defund-us’ campaigns if everyone’s putting their children up for adoption?
While I disagree with 2/3rds of the arguments he's made (increased breast cancer risk, depression) this one point is in fact well thought out. The abortion industry has made it a point to make adoption seem like a more monstrous path then killing a baby, and sadly, it's been effective enough that abortion is currently legal. How about that, a legal method of murdering a child.... In any case, the abortion industry, and pro-choicers will point out that adoption is a system full of child abuse, unwanted babies who are never adopted, and filthy conditions that make prisons seem pleasant.
I won't argue about that, the current adoption system is a mess, and needs reforms, however, it's no excuse to kill a baby at any stage in it's development. The argument I see most often is an argument of the potential of a bad life for the baby to be. Pro-Choicers, seriously, a potential argument? The argument that a baby may be the next Einstein is also a potential argument, and it gets shot down, usually by the claim that the baby could be the next Hitler. So why use potential in this case? Chances are equally great that the child to be will have an amazing life due to adoption. So, let's drop the potential bit aside.
Personally, I believe the adoption process should be made easier, smoother, and more accessible. People should be able to complete the adoption process in a matter of days, rather than the months, sometimes years that it takes. That more than anything, is why some children go unadopted.
So, discuss the flaws in adoption, and how we can correct them so that the evils of abortion can be eliminated.
Your numbers are useless. There's a big difference between a group "seeking adoption" and actually going through the process and doing it. There's a reason there's 100k+ kids floating in limbo.
Were every single orphan scooped up, I might empathize, but more than likely, adopters are picky and just want a bigger selection pool.
That's nice for them since they can get prettier babies, but bad for all the extra rejects.
Also: women shouldn't have some inborn right to raise a baby. Especially not to the point of forcing other women to grow them for them.
What if they're on Birth Control (taking precautions) and they get pregnant. My mom got pregnant twice while on the birth control pill. If she didn't want children, then should she be punished even though she was taking the pill? It comes down to personal choice. Should I force you to abide by my rules? no. Should you force us to abide by your rules? no.