I saw a blog the other day where some bleeding heart neo-con was crying about how she didn't understand how someone could have an abortion when so many families wanted a baby, but couldn't have one of their own. She was under the impression that all these "many families" had all given up taking fertility drugs, had settled on adopting 5-year-old black kids, and were unable to find one that was available.
I went to The Administration for Children and Families website, a division of the US department of Health and Human Services, to find out how many US kids were available to these many families. Feel free to check for yourselves, but here are the approximate numbers on orphans and available children up for adoption:
117,000 kids in the US, at the time of the report (1999), needed homes. 51% of these kids were black, 32% where white, 11% were Hispanic and 6% would qualify as other. 29% of these kids were babies under the age of 1 year old at the time they had been made available for adoption and 42% of them were between the ages of 1 and five. The average amount of time that these children had been waiting for a home was 46 months, almost 4 years. The numbers I am speaking of only include children in the US, so you must also consider the millions of orphans in other countries.
I'm sorry if you had your heart set on a newborn baby with blond hair and blue eyes, but nature already decided you can't have that. This is your next best option. So, until all these kids have homes or the pro-lifers adopt them all themselves, I don't want to hear about how terrible abortion is.
Another thing to consider for poor 16-year-olds who are pregnant is that roughly 17% of all children in the US (13 million) live in poverty. Children born to children are often born into poverty and are more likely to themselves become high school dropouts, teenage mothers and to be poor. So for a 16-year-old, keeping the baby is not a good option and neither is giving it up for adoption as that child will probably never find a home. Come to think of it, none of these options are easy decisions; abortion is not an easy way out as many say it is, and neither is carrying a baby for 9 months and then handing it over to someone else. Both can have serious emotional and /or medical consequences but I say either are better than a 16-year-old trying to raise a kid as a poor, young, uneducated single mother.
One last thing--while all these people are trying to put Jesus in our public schools, they may want to leave a little room for the condoms.
Sources: Deptartment of Health and Human Services, US Census
26 comments:
I think the psychological effects are evident in the fact that people try to find their birth parents once they find out they're adopted.
BUT GOD DOESN'T ALLOW CONDOMS! Silly man.
The Culture of Before Life and at Deaths Door is just ignorance towards progressive thought.
Have you seen the vibrator shaped like a crucifix ? ...It's heavenly...
maybe a jesus condom would fit just right...
RE: Indy
But we don't allow God into the public schools right?
Maybe somebody should push adoption as an alternative to fertility meds instead of as an alternative to abortion. That at least makes a little bit of sense.
Liz - I like your argument. It's simple, correct...and makes a lot of sense.
Liz:
Agreed
Great post. I once saw a bumper sticker that said "Either adopt a multi-racial crack-addicted Mongoloid baby or shut the fuck up."
I need that sticker
I want that sticker, too!
In Florida they have a "choose-Life" license plate. Every time I see one, I get road rage.
You should get one that says "choose to have a life"
The one thing that I could never understand about the pro-life advocates is how stem cell research got mixed in there. Abortion is legal (like it or not) shouldn't those aborted fetuses go to some use? Even if you're against abortion, how could you possibly be against scraping together some good out of so much evil? Not that I think its evil, just trying to make the point in context.
Brandon:
I didn't realize that was you on his site.
don't forget, these are all the same stupid fucks that want to make it so people also can't get hold of the planB/morning after pill.
having that pill available to anyone that needs/wants it will reduce abortions. period.
RE: Mike
The morning after pill would solve a lot of things; no one could possibly argue that a 1/2 day old embryo is a human life.
Bruiser:
Start your own blog; no one can erase you there. And the next time you are feeling so persecuted, find a nice big wooden cross and nail yourself to it.
Toad, there are plenty of people who will argue that a half-day old embryo is a human life. Unfortunately, I think you have scared them all away from your blog. I think it's time to go out and drum up some new people to come over and argue with us.
Nice new profile picture, by the way. When will we see the "Everything is totally screwed with the Katrina response" post?
Sorry this is a bit off-topic, but everyone should check out http://www.landoverbaptist.org/
F-ing hilarious!
RE Trick
Ya that's definitely link worthy; Check out the kids corner where they answer questions such as "why did Jesus have long hair like a homo?"
Isn't the N.O. thing obvious?
It says right on the FEMA and DHS websites.
From Department of Homeland Security:
In the event of a terrorist attack, natural disaster or other large-scale emergency, the Department of Homeland Security will assume primary responsibility on March 1st for ensuring that emergency response professionals are prepared for any situation. This will entail providing a coordinated, comprehensive federal response to any large-scale crisis and mounting a swift and effective recovery effort.
Yeah. SWIFT and EFFECTIVE.
well, there is no arguing with someone that thinks as soon as the sperm fucks the egg, then you are pregnant and that is a life.
we need to make this available to whomever needs it, and anyone that thinks differently is fucked in the head.
so screw 'em.
As someone who is having problems conceiving and who is considering adoption, I can honestly say that neocon's comment pisses me off. Who the hell is she to demand that women carry pregnancies for the benefit of infertile couples? That's nothing but pure selfishness to suggest that a woman should carry to term for the purpose of giving me what *I* want. I have no right to do it, and I won't. If we adopt, it will be from someone who has chosen to carry her pregnancy to term.
Add-on:
Ok, my last statement is silly in its obviousness - What I meant was that if we adopt, it will be from someone who has chosen to carry her pregnancy to term *out of a conscious decision-making process, as opposed to coercion or guilt.*
RE: Erinberry
Obviously
>no one could possibly argue
>that a 1/2 day old embryo
>is a human life.
Maybe they could just assert that it is and then say "period"?
For the most part, it isn't really five year olds being aborted, is it? Infants are in demand.
Arguments that adoption should eliminate the demand for abortion are one thing, but adoption is a valid thing to bring up in response to the pretense that abortion is the only alternative to raising an unwanted child.
Post a Comment