Sometimes you have to be blunt
Sometimes, reading their responses and just their stances in general, I wonder if the average pro-lifer gives ANY thought to children once they are no longer fetuses. If abortion was abolished tomorrow, do they believe that all the women would have aborted would suddenly change their minds and desperately want to be mothers? Do they believe the children born as a result will go on to lead sunny little lives? Or do they believe that regardless of the situation the children would just be thrilled to be alive? After all, they like being alive--why wouldn't anyone else?
Well, then let me pose another question:
How would you prefer the children to die? As tiny non-sentient human beings, or as fully aware human beings who can feel pain and terror? Apparently it's the latter. It disgusts me that people can look at abused and abandoned children, many of whom have experienced horror beyond our imagining, and think "ooh, but they're ALIVE, they should be HAPPY!" It disgusts me that people whine about abortion cutting into the number of adoptable kids but blissfully ignore the thousands clogging American state care or complain that there's not enough babies to go around and therefore women should carry pregnancies they don't want to carry just so someone can get a baby. It disgusts me that people can look at these damaged children and want MORE to come into the world.
Let me be blunt:
Some women do not want to be pregnant. Under ANY circumstances.
No child asks to be born.
And until you can come up with a viable solution as to what to do with all the children CURRENTLY EXISTING OUT OF UTERO before you compel women to bring forth every fetus ever created, I don't want to hear you bleating about all the "little innocent babies being slaughtered" because you're showing that you don't give a damn about children. Just as long as that nasty eight-week abortion isn't done, you apparently have no problem with children being molested, assaulted, abused and murdered once they're born. Not ONE "pro-lifer" who responded to my previous post said "Hey, listen, if I was running things this is what I'd do with the foster system." Nope, they came out with all the crap that they usually come out with, "waah, you're killing babies!" Well, apparently the only difference between pro-choice and pro-life is that pro-life prefers their children to suffer and be aware of it before they die.
Yes, I'm pissed off, what was your first clue?


41 Comments:
I would prefer the child not die at all and I don't think either of them need to die.
You're creating a false dilemma. What percentage of children who are placed in state care die in "pain and terror?" Does the fact that some children may die in the foster care system mean that we should kill all children before they enter the system?
No child asks to be born.
No child asks to learn how to walk, does that mean we should have a bunch of children who don't know how to walk?
No child asks not to be shot in the head, does that mean we should shot born children in the head because they haven't asked for it?
I'm sorry Patricia but your whole argument is like the telling the American Lung and Heart Association "You don't care about children because you haven't spent any time or money to find a cure to diabetes. Millions of people are dying from diabetes and you don't care because about them because your efforts aren't trying to save them."
We have problems with children being molested and killed once they're born. We abhor those horrible actions but we also abhor killing unborn children.
I proposed various solutions to unplanned pregnancies - most of which were completely ignored by pro-choice people.
Look at your question again. Please show me where you asked any prolifer to come up with solutions to the foster care system?
You didn't. And now you're wondering why no one answered the question you didn't ask. If you want a specific question answered, I propose you ask that question, not a different one, and expect an answer to a question you didn't ask.
By
JivinJ, at 10:13 AM
Because you are proposing making it compulsory to bring more children into a world where no one's taking care of the ones that are here now. Been to a third world country lately, Jive? Or, since you're close, a Detroit project? Visited your local social services office? Wouldn't you agree that there's enough damaged human beings in the world? Care about those who are here. Agree that better sexual education is needed to prevent more damaged human beings from entering the world. That is what I ask. Because all that will happen if abortion is outlawed is even more dead children and women. But since they aren't fetuses, they just don't matter to you, do they?
By
INS Webmaster, at 11:12 AM
As I said before, I would be happy to adopt a child whose mother was prevented from having an abortion. And I'd repeat the action as often as financially possible and would encourage others to do the same. How would we and other afford such a thing, and how could government make it easier, or even encourage such action? Well, perhaps parents could receive a substantial tax credit for adopting a child from a mother who was preventing from having an abortion. Perhaps the government could give an even greater tax credit for adopting a child of another race. Perhaps childcare and school vouchers could be given to such adoptive parents as well, all aimed at making it easier to shoulder the burden of more children. I promise this: If the government prevents a woman from having an abortion, I would take a raise the child. And if the government made it possible (by staying out of my wallet) I’d do it again and again.
By
www.AbortionWatch.com, at 11:24 AM
AbortionWatch, how about tax or cash incentives for the mothers too?
Many states (I know New Jersey off the top of my head from my brother's experience) already give a lot of breaks to those willing to adopt older or special-needs kids. But yes, I do believe tax incentives would be one way. But, like I said, shouldn't the older kids have a chance at homes first?
By
INS Webmaster, at 11:49 AM
So... y'all are happy to adopt a baby that would have been prevented by abortion. That's so nice of you!
Why not adopt a child that's already here? why not adopt a child that's been taken from her home because mommy was passed out on coke all the time, or daddy raped her? why not adopt a little boy who was abandoned on a street corner by a 16 year old mother who didn't want to deal with a toddler with FAS? Why not adopt a 16 year old autistic kid who's existing an a group home where no one has the time to change his diapers, so he's sitting in his own excrement all damned day? Why not adopt the 10 year old who sets fires wherever she can, and masturbates in public, because mommy did enough crack when she was pregnant to kill a horse, but obviously not enough to kill a fetus? Why not adopt the 12 year old who beats up on anyone he can, and has already raped an 8 year old girl, because "that's what daddy said it takes to be a man"?
These kids exist, and for many of them, the "life" their mothers gave them is a living hell. Pro-fetus people as a group do NOTHING to help these kids, and are frequently responsible for their mothers' not getting abortions when they could have. PF folks want "all" of them to live? it won't happen. We don't have the resources to feed/house/clothe the kids we can't even take care of now. PF folks want more? How sadistic.
Webmaster- your rant? perfect. I wouldn't change a word.
By
kitsunekaze, at 12:08 PM
I was going to post on your previous article, webmaster - about just this very thing...that there were no responses from pro-lifers w/ anything new or constructive. Just the same old crap.
I can't understand why pro-lifers think they can get into people's private lives. I can understand the few of them that actually have compassion for the fetus and for the pregnant woman in a crisis or unwanted pregnancy. There are a few, very few who want to help and would volunteer to raise the baby or find someone decent to raise the baby. The overwhelming majority of these people do not have compassion - they just whine and wail about abortion's evils - from a distance. They condemn and judge women and girls; yet they rarely condemn or judge the man or boy who gets his rocks off.
I can't understand politicians and govt leaders meddling into the private affairs of this country's citizens. If govt and society would like to see a reduction in abortion - it certainly wouldn't bother me to do so. Instead of spending big $$$ to make abortion illegal, which will do nothing to change the behavior of human beings, how about spending $$$ for teaching effective sex education and programs to teach boys to respect girls, to teach girls to have self-esteem, to teach women self-respect and empowerment, etc. Spending $$$ to assist more women in crisis pregnancies and to find homes for babies who are born to women who do not want them would be nice. However...then the conservatives and the mouthy pro-lifers will whine and wail about too many tax dollars being spent on this.
...and then there's the humanity thing. We humans sometimes like to have sex. We make choices and decisions that sometimes have an outcome that we did not plan for or think about. That's because we are human and not perfect. So no matter what programs are out there to reduce abortion numbers - lots of people are going to have sex as often as they can. That's the way it is. So there will always be unwanted pregnancies and there will always be abortion...just like there's always been prostitution - the oldest job on earth.
So until we human beings evolve into a more perfect animal (yeah, right) perhaps the pro-lifers should be concerned about their own lives and business...but if they just have to be involved in what's going on with other people and their sex lives...perhaps they should spend their time and $$$ with compassion and care for others rather than with condemnation and judgment.
By
Skate17, at 1:25 PM
The prostitution analogy is a good one -- I pointed out on another comment thread that it`s not even illegal eerywhere in the U.S. Just as there will always be prostitutes, legal or not, there will always be abortions, and lots of people will always condemn both. But some women will always choose them. The key is removing the circumstances in which women are FORCED into either abortion or prostitution, or feel as if such actions are their only choice.
By
L., at 2:25 PM
Patricia,
Again - you didn't ask anyone to address foster care- you asked prolifers to address how they would deal with newborn children from unwanted pregnancies.
Being ticked off at prolifers for not addressing a question you didn't ask is wholly irrational.
I've actually been to a variety of places where living is far from ideal - Soweto, South Africa - for example. But I don't see how that would lead me to think it should be legal to kill unborn human beings. Some born human beings suffer. No one is arguing that. But I wonder why that is a good reason to kill other human beings, born or unborn.
Care about those who are here.
You're assuming I accept the pro-choice position again. The unborn are "here" as well. That's like someone telling a neonatal nurse "Don't care about the newborn infants, care about human beings that are actually here." The whole argument assumes that the unborn/neonatal infants doesn't exist/aren't valuable when that the exact thing you need to prove.
But since they aren't fetuses, they just don't matter to you, do they?
Of course other human beings who aren't fetuses matter to me. Your reasoning seems to be - "Since you care about unborn human beings that means you don't care about born human beings." -
I can't grasp this concept of how me caring for unborn human beings would someone lead you to believe I only care for unborn human beings. Again, that's like telling someone who works to save people with diabetes - "But since they don't have diabetes, they just don't matter to you, right?" or someone accusing you of only caring for pregnant women who don't regret their abortion. "But since they didn't have an abortion or they did and they do regret, they just don't matter to you, right?"
It's a pretty bad argument, isn't it?
By
JivinJ, at 2:27 PM
I agree that there should be tax/monetary federal and state incentives for single parents, and assistance for single parents that doesn't just include
food but also education opportunities to allow them to be self-sufficient and succeed.
I also think there should be help and tax/monetary federal and state incentives for people that adopt.
The problem is that a lot of people will moan about the "welfare queen" and "promotion of single motherhood." Seriously- would you agree to tax increases to support these people, because I would.
Also, this comment:
"And if the government made it possible (by staying out of my wallet) I’d do it again and again."
The problem is that the government NEEDS to tax people to fund these "monetary" incentives. If you want govenment to give to people that really need it, people need to get off their ass and support politicians that are pro-people and not pro-corporation/industry (and lemme just say that's not the Republican Party).
"As I said before, I would be happy to adopt a child whose mother was prevented from having an abortion. And I'd repeat the action as often as financially possible and would encourage others to do the same."
Well, that's very nice of you- but it's NOT working so well for the rest of the world, is it? Otherwise, we wouldn't have kids in foster care. considering the MILLIONS that people spend for infertility treatments, and the fact that most people consider adoption a last resort and not the first choice...
By
Cattygurl, at 2:37 PM
That's a poor argument on your part, Jive, because you have yet to present any ideas on what to do with all these unborn babies once they arrive--and why they should take precedence over those already here. I asked the question pretty clearly, and all you're throwing out is rhetoric. If we can't take care of the children who are already here, then why do you want to add to that number? Why do you want to see MORE neglected children? Because by outlawing abortion--not to mention the stuff that prevents abortion, such as effective contraception and sex education, as a lot of your pro-life brethren do--that's what you're doing.
I asked a question. You haven't answered it--something that you spend quite a bit of time accusing people here of not doing for you. So again--if it was up to you, what would you do with the children? Don't pick apart what you think I'm implying. Answer the question, because I'm getting damn tired of the rhetoric.
By
INS Webmaster, at 2:59 PM
Great points, kitsunekaze. Some women and girls out there already are forced to give birth by their governments (in Poland abortion is illegal), families (in some parts of the US a girl can't get an abortion without her parents' permission), etc. Why not adopt the babies they already had and already don't want?
By
Mina, at 4:44 PM
Patricia,
Why do you want to see MORE neglected children?
I don't. I want to see less dead children.
So again--if it was up to you, what would you do with the children?
Well, which children are you talking about now? Are you talking about 10 year-old foster children? Or are you talking about newborn children from unwanted pregnancies? Or both? Last time you pulled a switch-a-roo - asking for answers to one and then getting mad that you didn't get answers for the one you didn't ask for.
To help foster children get adopted there are a number of things are gov't has done or could do. Such as tax credits for parents who adopt (maybe increasing this tax credit for families that adopt children with special needs), trying to raise awareness, getting rid of the some of the unnecessary red tape involved in adoption, providing more financial support to organizations that encourage the adoption of older children, more help in rehabing parents who have lost their parental rights, encouraging foster parents to permanently adopt children, encouraging other family members to adopt the children, encouraging more families to be foster parents. We also have to recognize that not all children in foster care are available for adoption - parental rights have not been completely severed.
Do you know if the # of children in foster care has risen or fallen since Roe v. Wade?
By
JivinJ, at 8:32 AM
I don't know, but I'd imagine it's risen simply because the population has increased. I really should find a Stat Guy/Girl to look these things up.
By
INS Webmaster, at 8:40 AM
The number of children in foster
By
Cari, at 4:06 PM
Care has risen, BUT it has risen because our population has risen. OKAY first of all, MOST children in the foster care system need a permanent home. Don't believe me? Call your local department of S.S., and inquire about becoming a foster parent, then ask if you can keep or "Adopt" them. They'll love to hear someone say that, because these kids need homes. CALL, I double Dare you. You will find out that many kids,( NO Not precious white newborns, sorry) ARE AVAILABLE NOW. Here In charlotte N.C. RIGHT NOW THERE ARE 100,000 Kids on an EMERGENCY foster list. This means that there are not enough homes to go around, so they are being passed from different homes until a PERMANENT home is found. Call your Local department. THIS PISSES the hell outta me too!! You are all worried about a stupid fukin unborn fetus, when there are 16 yr old girls being raped by HORRIBLE foster families. We need more FOSTER PARENTS, Not children being born to 15 yr old girls who are told to "Give it Life" by their asshole moms who just wanna see a goddamn newborn and the "Fuck" with everyone else.
By
Cari, at 4:16 PM
To the Webmaster:
One thing my husband told me, and which I think is quite true is thus:
Asking for sense from a pro-lifer is like wrestling a pig. You both get muddy, but only the pig enjoys it.
By
Watcher, at 4:32 PM
inswebmaster,
There is no argument on abortion. You can't justify abortion by saying their are too many foster kids already. The "foster kid" problem is not going to be solved by killing the unborn. It's been over 30 years since abortion was made legal and there is still a problem with foster homes. I should know I lived in one for half a year when I was ten years old. But that doesn't make me a bad person or mean that I should have been aborted. And I'm sure I've accomplished alot more than you in your lifetime and I'm only seventeen. It seems the only thing you've accomplished is having an aborion and made a "proud-of-it" blog.
Also, I have a foster brother who is ten years old right now. His mom had him when she was 15 and her mom wanted her to abort him but she didn't. Now that he's here, yeah he's been in and out of foster homes(mine being the latest) but he's normal and I know he will have a better life than you have. So who do you think you are too judge a child whether his/her life will be not worth living? You're not anybody.
And the fact will always remain that abortion will never solve the foster kid problem. It only and will only do one thing: Deprive human beings from having a chance at life, whether it's a good one or a bad one.
And I'll ask one more time, Who are you to say whether or not my life is worth living or not?
By
shady, at 7:32 PM
Two trailer park girls go 'round the outside, 'round the outside, 'round the ... oh, not that Shady, oops, sorry.
And who am I to judge? Who are you to judge? You say that your foster brother has a better life than mine. That's judging, wouldn't you say? I would, if I cared enough.
Sorry, you haven't said anything new. I doubt you will, but try. I'm starting the pool on what cliches you'll come up with next, but since you're obviously young I try not to fault an animal for its training.
By
INS Webmaster, at 8:25 PM
You don't have any thing new to say either. "you haven't said anything new" That line is your only defense. Ummm....look at your blogs...they're nothing but repeats...over and over and over...and over again. Instead of trying to diss me why don't you stick to the abortion issue? And how do I know my foster brothers life is better than yours? Just take one look at your low life blog....and please, it ain't nothing new.
And how else am I supposed to judge you other than by what you say?
By
shady, at 9:10 PM
Shady..You are already born, both you and your foster brother. You say your life is so good? What did your mother do to you ?What caused you to be in foster care? How about your foster brother? I had a great, CHOSEN LIFE. Yes I was a choice, my mom WAS HAPPY to have me into this world. I was not a mistake, I was not unwanted. IF I WAS THEN I'd rather my mom had an abortion. I don't think anyone, including my mom should've had children against her will. MY best friend was in foster care, adopted at the age of 16. She said growing up was hell, and she wished her mom thought more about having kids than she obviously did. Because her mom was in no way mentally ready to have kids, never would be. I am glad you love life, I do too. But the fact is if you were aborted IT WOULD MAKE NO DAMN DIFFERENCE. You would not exist, you would'nt know any better.
By
Cari, at 9:39 PM
"But the fact is if you were aborted IT WOULD MAKE NO DAMN DIFFERENCE. You would not exist, you would'nt know any better."
Exactly - the same way all the kids Shady could have had, but deprived of a chance at life*, don't exist and don't know any better.
* unless Shady did have as many kids as possible - constantly pregnant since menarche if female, never taking "no" for an answer from a fertile woman or girl if male, etc.
By
Mina, at 10:43 PM
"And I'm sure I've accomplished alot more than you in your lifetime and I'm only seventeen."
What a cute little over-hyped superiority complex you have there.
By
Watcher, at 4:51 AM
Shady, if you do not have anything relevant to say other than perceived insults to me, please refrain. As I said, you're not saying anything I haven't already read/heard/seen before. I don't insult or offend easily. You're just another kid who thinks he/she has all the answers. I thought I had all the answers too when I was your age. Life will teach you otherwise, trust me.
The ice is getting thin. Be careful where you step.
By
INS Webmaster, at 7:03 AM
Jive:
I don't. I want to see less dead children.
Except that you don't. You want to see less dead fetuses. Less dead fetuses that no one wants. I don't want to open my newspaper and read about a child getting beaten by it's parent. I'd like to stop hearing about children being abused, neglected and killed because social services couldn't get to them in time.
I'm sick and tired of hearing about women giving birth to a child they'll never see, and expecting someone to take care of it. I'm expecially sick of people saying "Well, at least he/she's alive. Doesn't matter that they were raped, beaten, starved, or verbally abused. They're glad they're alive! I know I am!"
Why haven't you answered the question? Why have you never put forth a solution to help all the unwanted children in this country (America)? Do you care?
By
Samantha, at 8:23 AM
It's all 'As of September 30th, 2001'. Will look for something more recent later.
http://nccanch.acf.hhs.gov/pubs/factsheets/foster.cfm
Point in Time. As of September 30, 2001, there were an estimated 542,000 children in foster care.
Point in Time. The median age of the children in foster care on September 30, 2001 was 10.6 years.
Point in Time. Of the estimated 542,000 children in foster care as of September 30, 2001: 38 percent were Black/Non-Hispanic; 37 percent were White/Non-Hispanic; 17 percent were Hispanic; and 8 percent were other races/ethnic origins.
A median 10.3 percent of children who entered foster care in FY 2000 were re-entering the system within 12 months of discharge. (Page III-2, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, 2003b).
The Urban Institute estimates in FY 2000, total spending (Federal, State, and local) for out-of-home care was at least $9.1 billion (Page 8, Bess, Roseana, et al., 2002).
By
Samantha, at 8:31 AM
It's all 'As of September 30th, 2001'. Will look for something more recent later.
http://nccanch.acf.hhs.gov/pubs/factsheets/foster.cfm
Point in Time. As of September 30, 2001, there were an estimated 542,000 children in foster care.
Point in Time. The median age of the children in foster care on September 30, 2001 was 10.6 years.
Point in Time. Of the estimated 542,000 children in foster care as of September 30, 2001: 38 percent were Black/Non-Hispanic; 37 percent were White/Non-Hispanic; 17 percent were Hispanic; and 8 percent were other races/ethnic origins.
A median 10.3 percent of children who entered foster care in FY 2000 were re-entering the system within 12 months of discharge. (Page III-2, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, 2003b).
The Urban Institute estimates in FY 2000, total spending (Federal, State, and local) for out-of-home care was at least $9.1 billion (Page 8, Bess, Roseana, et al., 2002).
By
Samantha, at 8:32 AM
"The "foster kid" problem is not going to be solved by killing the unborn. "
No, it will simply be exacerbated. (made worse, for those who haven't passed 8th grade yet.) So, instead of trying to solve a legitimate problem, you want to make it worse. How sadistic of you.
And.. you want to do it by forcing women to let someone else use her body against her will (definition of rape, anyone?). How VERY sadistic of you. Nice Job!!!
"...but he's normal and I know he will have a better life than you have."
And you're basing this one what, exactly? Inquisitive minds wish to be informed over here. Your own subjective, sadistic sense of morality?
"And I'll ask one more time, Who are you to say whether or not my life is worth living or not?"
OOH! I know the answer to this one!!!
None of us. It's not up to us, and never was. It was up to your mother, before you were born, and it's up to you now. Likewise, it's not up to you to decide that another woman has to provide life to a person if she doesn't wish to. It's not up to you to decide to force another woman to let someone else use her body against her will. It's not up to me, It's not up to the webmaster, it's up to each particular woman who finds herself unintentionally pregnant.
By
kitsunekaze, at 9:39 AM
Ooh, I know the answer to this one!
I like your argument, Kit, but I have to admit I also enjoy the snark. Good job!
By
INS Webmaster, at 10:29 AM
In 2001 over 1/2 a millions kids in foster care w/9.1 billion spent for out-of-home care (from Kats... email). Hm..so let's add to these enormous figures by criminalizing abortion and adding more unwanted kids into the system. Then there's the enormous cost of rounding up all the pregnant girls & women in crisis or plain unwanted pregnancies who go to hidden clinics to have abortions - and jailing & prosecuting them; the enormous money spent by local/state/fed govt to arrest and prosecute all the good people who want to help these girls and women obtain illegal abortions - especially those in a crisis situation. Way to make things better for children, pro-lifers! Yeah!
By
Skate17, at 1:41 PM
Oh and if you want to read some interesting stats re: deaths per illegal vs legal abortion head over to the "Oh, the unoriginality ... with special guest blogger!" thread; I've posted some there.
By
Skate17, at 2:07 PM
Samantha,
Except that you don't. You want to see less dead fetuses. Less dead fetuses that no one wants.
Then the real question isn't "Can JivinJ come up with a perfect solution to children from unwanted pregnancies?" but "Are the unborn valuable like the born children?"
The whole "solve unwanted pregnancy" was a smokescreen to avoid the real issue.
Why have you never put forth a solution to help all the unwanted children in this country (America)? Do you care?
Have you read the comments for these last couple of posts? I've posted a number of different possible ways to help with this problem.
Regarding the above statistics on foster care children. I've read online that only around 125,000 of these 500,000+ children are available for adoption.
By
JivinJ, at 4:14 PM
Cari,
Do you have anything to back up the statement that "In charlotte N.C. RIGHT NOW THERE ARE 100,000 Kids on an EMERGENCY foster list."
That seems impossible as there are only 650,000 people living in the city and around 2 million people in the metropolitian area.
It is true that sixteen year old girl might be raped by her foster care parent. That's obviously horrible. But why would that lead anyone to think it should be legal to kill the unborn. Horrible stuff happens to people everyday - why does that mean it should be legal to kill human beings before they are born?
By
JivinJ, at 4:26 PM
We actually have a higher population than that.. Yes I can back that up. Would you like me to post the phone number for DSS of mecklenburg county? I called them roughly a year and a half ago to prove a point to someone, to prove to them that we have a lot of kids in foster care. They told me that that on any given day this is the number. So..
**** WWW.CHARMECK.ORG General Foster parent info 704 336 2131 CALL THEM .. Look on their website
By
Cari, at 3:21 PM
I am sorry I have pnuemonia and musta been Button HAPPY.. :P I MEANT 10,000.. In jnuary 1993 there were 10,847 kids in foster care. Almost half are needing PERMANENT HOMES. There were 1,337 kids adopted out of the foster system. Most kids in foster care grew up in poverty and are neglected and abused by parents that do not want them.
By
Cari, at 3:31 PM
Jive:
"Have you read the comments for these last couple of posts? I've posted a number of different possible ways to help with this problem."
If your solution is telling us that there are poor white childless couples who want to adopt perfect white newborns, then fine. However you have said nothing to even suggest a way of helping the born children in need of homes.
I'll make it easy for you. Answer this question:
How do you suggest helping the born children waiting to get adopted? Because if you're right and there are 40 couples waiting to adopt, what's wrong with adopting an older child? If there are so many women crying themselves to sleep because they can't have kids and are waiting to adopt, why aren't they adopting the 8 year old? Why aren't they adopting the black child?
Why do you only care about giving unwanted potential newborns homes and not the born children?
By
Samantha, at 8:17 AM
I am betting because NEWBORNS can be molded and shaped into WHOEVER the adoptive parents choose. Foster kids already have their own identity. What these whackjob christians do not understand is thatparenting is'nt about control, it's about raising a smart INDIVIDUAL who is well adjusted and ready for society.
By
Cari, at 5:24 PM
Samantha,
There's nothing wrong with adopting a born child in state care - that's a great thing but not all parents looking to adopt are looking to adopt an older child with special needs. Many parents may not feel they have the skills to parent a child with special needs.
Our government could definitely do more to help these children - and try to persuade couples looking to adopt to look towards children in state care instead of looking overseas. Tax breaks, media campaigns, making it easier for family members to adopt, etc.
Why do you only care about giving unwanted potential newborns homes and not the born children?
I don't. I care about both born and unborn children.
By
JivinJ, at 2:08 PM
Jivinj, I am not going to ask you to provide solution for reform of foster care system, all I want to know what is it exactly do you do to help those kids (besides posting on this blog). Here are few very simple questions for you:
a) How many children have you adopted out of the foster care?
b) If any, what ages where they when adopted?
c) Were they healthy or special needs?
d) How much money (no, not taxes, extra money because you care so much) do you give away every week/month/etc to help support children that are in foster care and waiting to be adopted?
e) Have you offered to share your home to a mother with a child who had a kid she can't support/has no place to live?
f)If yes, how many of them presently live with you?
By
portia, at 9:19 PM
I am so thankful that you posted this particular blog. My husband was often neglected because he was unwanted (and both parents made that fact known) and his parents were both very young when he was born. His childhood was horrible and when I first met him (in a divorce recovery meeting for teens), he had just attempted suicide. He told me, from the beginning, that he wished for more years than not that he had never been born and that his life was too painful to continue. Over the years, I have been by his side in his recovery and he still has a long way to go. To many prolifers, he is very rude in pointing out that NO, a 'life' is NOT better than never being born, especially when you are a child or are young and cannot escape the situation.
On the flip side, I have a cousin who is infertile, white, and now wealthy. She refused to adopt anything other than the Perfect, Healthy, White infant and thus waited for 6 years. I found this to be absolutely the most disgusting thing I had ever seen before and I routinely put her in her place when she complained that there weren't enough babies to go around.
"Oh, there are Trisha, they just aren't lily white enough for you."
I have seen this from yet, another perspective as well. A young Woman, 18, becomes pregnant and is personally prolife and decides to keep the pregnancy. She starts talking to adoption agencies though because she knows she's going to college and cannot afford to raise a child. Everything is going very well with the agency until they ask what the race is of the father and she tells them that he is black. They tell her, "I'm sorry but you can't be a candidate for a program" and hang up. They no longer take her phone calls and she quickly discovers that other agencies stop talking to her when she makes it known that her pregnancy will result in a bi-racial child. Faced with this, she chooses an abortion. My Aunt discovered that there were and continue to be thousands of couples waiting to adopt. They are just waiting for white-only children who are healthy and free from any defect.
What's most instructive about my Aunt's experience is that she did try some "christian" adoption agencies who treated her in the same way.
By
Jenna, at 11:32 PM
www.abortionwatch,com said: I gladly take children who were saved from abortion, I would take as many as my financies would allow.
Well not everyone on the planet is as giving as you are. Not everybody is willing to fill their homes with somebody else's children no matter how big of a cash incentive.
By
shelerella, at 6:52 PM
This blog is fantastic, is very interesting, I like the colors, are awesome. Keep it and show us more!!!! Do you wanto to see something more? Look... Glass Bongs and Bong featuring Herbal Smoke, water bongs, bongs online head shop, Marijuana Alternative,glass water bongs, Hashish, Ganja, homemade bongs, Smokeshop, cannibis, legal smoking alternatives for herbal highs and aphrodisia. http://www.headshopinternational.com
By
costa rica, at 2:48 PM
Post a Comment
<< Home