Why are our tax dollars going to fund other countries'' abortions?

[swimmer]

Date: 1/26/2009 9:00:53 PM
Author: beebrisk

Date: 1/26/2009 8:39:27 PM

Author: swimmer

Probably not touching the central issue here.



Just wanted to point out to Beebrisk and anyone else who might feel that the US is alone in the abuse of children. You know that 25 million Chinese girls are missing, technically they were never born, but statistically that is impossible. You probably also know that infanticide is not uncommon in West Africa, and the child soldiers of East Africa are not always stolen. I've seen children maimed by their parents in India in order to beg more effectively (did you see Slumdog Millionaire? You might feel differently about the US sending our excess corn to other people.) Children are sold into sexual slavery and just plain old slavery in a few Southeast Asian countries and frequently end up exploited by Europeans and Americans.



Yes, most women in the developing world and everywhere would do anything to feed their children, but some are fine seeing their children die as 'martyrs' killing other womens' children. Are these women just insane with some sort of blood lust? NO, the are lacking food, education, resources, and hope for the future. That is the only thing that could compel a rational woman to hurt her child.



The USA is unique in many ways, but very sadly child abuse, infanticide, and abuse is not limited to us. Of course the need for healthcare and education to prevent unwanted pregnancy is universal. The ending of the gag rule will help with condom distribution and HIV-AIDS education that is based on science..




Klewis, I'm a huge fan of NZ, but you are blindly and erroneously lashing out at many of us who share similar sentiments about the mindless/brainless nature of war, etc. Um, yeah, Turkey give the US any aid money back? Are you smoking hashish? They really need that funding. Do be careful with generalizations, we could start talking about what YOU personally did to exploit the Maori.

Look at each of the countries you listed above. Communist, iron-fisted, totalitarian societies. (Except for India of course, but then they still have that little problem of the caste system).


Aren't we supposed to be the civilized ones?? Aren't we supposed to set an example in the world? Can we agree that reverence for life is the right thing? The moral thing?



Lack of food, education, resources and hope are NOT compelling reasons to hurt a child. It does NOT make it right or acceptable and for us to work under that assumption makes us no better than China, East Africa or any of the others.

I totally agree! And was certainly not saying child abuse is OK, just pointing out that "only the US" comment is wrong. My enormous apologies for not being more clear! It was someone else who was against the US funding assistance in other countries. I also feel very strongly that there is no reason for us to exist if we do not help others.

The New Colossus

Not like the brazen giant of Greek fame,

With conquering limbs astride from land to land;

Here at our sea-washed, sunset gates shall stand

A mighty woman with a torch, whose flame

Is the imprisoned lightning, and her name

Mother of Exiles. From her beacon-hand

Glows world-wide welcome; her mild eyes command

The air-bridged harbor that twin cities frame.

"Keep ancient lands, your storied pomp!" cries she

With silent lips. "Give me your tired, your poor,

Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free,

The wretched refuse of your teeming shore.

Send these, the homeless, tempest-tost to me,

I lift my lamp beside the golden door!"

 

[E B]

Date: 1/26/2009 9:00:53 PM
Author: beebrisk

Lack of food, education, resources and hope are NOT compelling reasons to hurt a child. It does NOT make it right or acceptable and for us to work under that assumption makes us no better than China, East Africa or any of the others.

I think you''re looking for an argument where there isn''t one. Vespergirl mentioned that neglect and abuse exist in situations where women (and their partners) aren''t prepared to be parents- and it does. Will anyone agree that its an acceptable excuse? Absolutely not.

 

[diamondseeker2006]

Date: 1/26/2009 9:02:36 PM
Author: beebrisk

Date: 1/26/2009 8:25:28 PM
Author: kellyfish

Date: 1/22/2009 1:01:39 AM

Author: strmrdr

cheaper to kill em than feed em

So true!! Just wait until Socialized medicine rolls in! You will start seeing a big push towards full legalized abortion and ''right to die'' legislation. Get ''em off your books ''cause they cost too much to the gov''t. Think that sounds unbelievable? It''s not. Just do a search for it & see what is happening in other countries with socialized medicine......

Yup. It''s took 30 or so years, but that slippery slope known as Rowe V Wade is rolling toward it''s natural, humanist conclusion.

Welcome to the brave new world.

You might want to read up on Margaret Sanger, the founder of Planned Parenthood, and her support of eugenics. We don''t hear too much about that these days.

 

[E B]

Date: 1/26/2009 7:25:42 PM
Author: beebrisk

Mothers neglect and abuse their children because they are evil. Pure and simple. Child neglect and abuse has NOTHING to do with the ''preparedness'' of the mother.

I should also add that while this is a nice thought, it isn''t realistic. You can''t say that in situations of severe neglect/abuse, a parent''s level of ''preparedness'' doesn''t/shouldn''t factor in. In a fantasy world, of course not- but it does, the degree depending on the issue. Not in every situation, mind you, but in many.

 

[risingsun]

Date: 1/26/2009 8:39:27 PM
Author: swimmer
Probably not touching the central issue here.

Just wanted to point out to Beebrisk and anyone else who might feel that the US is alone in the abuse of children. You know that 25 million Chinese girls are missing, technically they were never born, but statistically that is impossible. You probably also know that infanticide is not uncommon in West Africa, and the child soldiers of East Africa are not always stolen. I've seen children maimed by their parents in India in order to beg more effectively (did you see Slumdog Millionaire? You might feel differently about the US sending our excess corn to other people.) Children are sold into sexual slavery and just plain old slavery in a few Southeast Asian countries and frequently end up exploited by Europeans and Americans.

Yes, most women in the developing world and everywhere would do anything to feed their children, but some are fine seeing their children die as 'martyrs' killing other womens' children. Are these women just insane with some sort of blood lust? NO, the are lacking food, education, resources, and hope for the future. That is the only thing that could compel a rational woman to hurt her child.

The USA is unique in many ways, but very sadly child abuse, infanticide, and abuse is not limited to us. Of course the need for healthcare and education to prevent unwanted pregnancy is universal. The ending of the gag rule will help with condom distribution and HIV-AIDS education that is based on science..


Klewis, I'm a huge fan of NZ, but you are blindly and erroneously lashing out at many of us who share similar sentiments about the mindless/brainless nature of war, etc. Um, yeah, Turkey give the US any aid money back? Are you smoking hashish? They really need that funding. Do be careful with generalizations, we could start talking about what YOU personally did to exploit the Maori.

Thank you for this breath of sanity in this discussion. The treatment of children in other parts of the world is quite horrific. That does not mean we should excuse it in our own country, but we could, at least, attempt to have some perspective on this issue. The notion that women who neglect and abuse their children are all evil is a simplistic view of a complex dynamic. Some people are terrible parents and shouldn't have children. Would you prefer that these children be born and abused or not born in the first place. Think about it before coming up with a rote response. Preparedness for parenthood is a protective factor in the child-parent relationship. I see this repeatedly in my practice.
I believe that family planning is an essential part of our humanitarian aid to developing countries. No one is forcing these women to have abortions. They are being given a choice. Until you live in their circumstances, please do not dictate what that choice should be. We don't get to determine where and how our tax dollars are spent. I would have preferred that none of mine were used to fund the war in Iraq.

 

[klewis]

Date: 1/26/2009 8:39:27 PM
Author: swimmer
Probably not touching the central issue here.


Just wanted to point out to Beebrisk and anyone else who might feel that the US is alone in the abuse of children. You know that 25 million Chinese girls are missing, technically they were never born, but statistically that is impossible. You probably also know that infanticide is not uncommon in West Africa, and the child soldiers of East Africa are not always stolen. I''ve seen children maimed by their parents in India in order to beg more effectively (did you see Slumdog Millionaire? You might feel differently about the US sending our excess corn to other people.) Children are sold into sexual slavery and just plain old slavery in a few Southeast Asian countries and frequently end up exploited by Europeans and Americans.


Yes, most women in the developing world and everywhere would do anything to feed their children, but some are fine seeing their children die as ''martyrs'' killing other womens'' children. Are these women just insane with some sort of blood lust? NO, the are lacking food, education, resources, and hope for the future. That is the only thing that could compel a rational woman to hurt her child.


The USA is unique in many ways, but very sadly child abuse, infanticide, and abuse is not limited to us. Of course the need for healthcare and education to prevent unwanted pregnancy is universal. The ending of the gag rule will help with condom distribution and HIV-AIDS education that is based on science..



Klewis, I''m a huge fan of NZ, but you are blindly and erroneously lashing out at many of us who share similar sentiments about the mindless/brainless nature of war, etc. Um, yeah, Turkey give the US any aid money back? Are you smoking hashish? They really need that funding. Do be careful with generalizations, we could start talking about what YOU personally did to exploit the Maori.

No, I don''t smoke the stuff.

Yes we did exploit the Maori, and I guess you could say that I, as a citizen of the elected government that has exploited them have benefited, then I exploited so you you are essentially right. The Maori did fare quite well compared to many other indigenous people ( no consolation to them) and the Treaty of Waitangi is now enshrined in law in so wrongs are being righted - vast sums of money are being paid New Zealanders via the Government in compensation and hundreds of thousands of acres of land that was stolen is being, or has been returned to the rightful owners. It''s going to takes decades but justice will be done and I''m really proud of it. My nephews are of the Ngati Porou Maori.

 

[klewis]

vespergirl I thought what you said was:

"I am also completely against the war in Iraq for this reason....... we are building Iraq''s infrastructure while our own needs rebuilding."


I have added the ........s to show you how I read it. So it seemed odd to me that someone would be opposed to a war for that reason. Apparently I misunderstood you and so I apologize.

 

[vespergirl]

Date: 1/26/2009 7:25:42 PM
Author: beebrisk

Date: 1/26/2009 9:07:42 AM
Author: vespergirl

Date: 1/21/2009 7:18:58 PM

Author: starsapphire

But why does this money have to go to other countries? Why can''t we just take care of the people in THIS country first?

Agreed - I wish that we provided federal funding for abortions here in the US. It would take millions of women and children off of our welfare rolls, and prevent the rampant child neglect and abuse that happens in situations where mothers have children that they are not prepared to care for.


I am also completely against the war in Iraq for this reason - we are building Iraq''s infrastructure while our own needs rebuilding.

So a woman isn''t ready or prepared to have a child and my tax dollars should pay for her abortion? What happened to personal responsibility?? Why should I (or anyone else) have to pay for that???

And it''s better to have an abortion because after all, if a woman isn''t prepared she might abuse her own child?? What happened to human decency?

Mothers neglect and abuse their children because they are evil. Pure and simple. Child neglect and abuse has NOTHING to do with the ''preparedness'' of the mother. If that were the case, why don''t we see a rash of child murderers in 3rd world countries?? No, in those places you see mothers STRUGGLING to provide for their children, scrounging for every morsel they can find to feed their babies. And they don''t neglect them, beat them or murder them. Those poor children, born under the world''s WORST circumstances are loved and nurtured and protected. Only here in America, in this extraordinary selfish society we''ve created along with our twisted reasoning can we promote and condone abortion to prevent ''unprepared'' mothers from harming their children.

And I''m told to pay for it!!??

Despicable on every level.

Just a quick question I have to all the people who are anti-choice: what have you done to help pregnant women who are not prepared to raise their children? Have you adopted any children? Are you foster parents? Do you volunteer your own time and money to help raise unwanted children? If so, then good for you. If not, then please stop telling women that they need to give birth to children that they cannot raise. I, for one, am tired of seeing my tax dollars go to failing programs intended to help these children, but in actuality do little more than perpetuate generational poverty and ignorance. I see so many anti-choice people championing the lives of unborn babies, but then I see very few of them with a houseful of crack babies that they adopted from mothers who would have otherwise chosen to terminate their pregnancies. Unless you are prepared to become responsible for the lives of those children, please don''t dictate other women''s life choices. And yes, I believe that contraception, or even sterilization would be the best choice for some women who have proven themselves to be irresponsible or abusive mothers, but after that, I think that sometimes the most merciful solution would be to spare the child from the miseryof an abusive childhood.

 

[vespergirl]

Date: 1/27/2009 12:56:04 AM
Author: klewis
vespergirl I thought what you said was:

''I am also completely against the war in Iraq for this reason....... we are building Iraq''s infrastructure while our own needs rebuilding.''


I have added the ........s to show you how I read it. So it seemed odd to me that someone would be opposed to a war for that reason. Apparently I misunderstood you and so I apologize.

No worries - sorry if my response was a little harsh. These topics tend to get one fired up ... let''s put it behind us.

 

[E B]

Date: 1/27/2009 11:02:18 AM
Author: vespergirl

Just a quick question I have to all the people who are anti-choice: what have you done to help pregnant women who are not prepared to raise their children?

Well said, vesper. I''d also like to add that I''ve come across many a pro-life/anti-choice conservative who''s outraged that so many of his or her tax dollars are going to social welfare programs. Bums who don''t want to work shouldn''t be sucking my hard-earned money away, right? It just so happens that children are the largest group accepting public assistance. I guess once they''re born, their little lives don''t matter as much. A life has been saved! Now, the mother who ''threw responsibility out the window'' gets to lie in the bed she made.

In a perfect world, everyone who doesn''t/can''t raise a child would use protection, that protection would never fail, and children would be born into warm, snuggly, loving homes. In the real world, however, I just can''t get behind the whole idea that "personal responsibility" should be enough, because it isn''t realistic. Accidents happen, bad decisions are made, and once the child you fight so hard for is born to a woman who wasn''t prepared to handle one in the first place- well, what then? I find it to be an incredibly misogynistic way of thinking.

 

[movie zombie]

well stated Vesper and Ebree!

so the kid gets to suffer the sins of the mother [AND FATHER] because society just doesn''t want to step up to the plate and provide, merely breathing air is i guess supposed to sufficient for a life.

movie zombie

 

[MoonWater]

vespergirl is expressing my views on the subject quite well.

i was a big fan of Mudhoney as a teen, they wrote a great song on this issue which i would always reference when this topic came up, however vesper put it much more nicely than they did lol...

 

[MoonWater]

Date: 1/27/2009 12:04:53 AM
Author: risingsun
Thank you for this breath of sanity in this discussion. The treatment of children in other parts of the world is quite horrific. That does not mean we should excuse it in our own country, but we could, at least, attempt to have some perspective on this issue. The notion that women who neglect and abuse their children are all evil is a simplistic view of a complex dynamic. Some people are terrible parents and shouldn''t have children. Would you prefer that these children be born and abused or not born in the first place. Think about it before coming up with a rote response. Preparedness for parenthood is a protective factor in the child-parent relationship. I see this repeatedly in my practice.
I believe that family planning is an essential part of our humanitarian aid to developing countries. No one is forcing these women to have abortions. They are being given a choice. Until you live in their circumstances, please do not dictate what that choice should be. We don''t get to determine where and how our tax dollars are spent. I would have preferred that none of mine were used to fund the war in Iraq.

 

[diamondseeker2006]

Date: 1/27/2009 11:02:18 AM
Author: vespergirl



Just a quick question I have to all the people who are anti-choice: what have you done to help pregnant women who are not prepared to raise their children? Have you adopted any children? Are you foster parents? Do you volunteer your own time and money to help raise unwanted children? If so, then good for you. If not, then please stop telling women that they need to give birth to children that they cannot raise. I, for one, am tired of seeing my tax dollars go to failing programs intended to help these children, but in actuality do little more than perpetuate generational poverty and ignorance. I see so many anti-choice people championing the lives of unborn babies, but then I see very few of them with a houseful of crack babies that they adopted from mothers who would have otherwise chosen to terminate their pregnancies. Unless you are prepared to become responsible for the lives of those children, please don''t dictate other women''s life choices. And yes, I believe that contraception, or even sterilization would be the best choice for some women who have proven themselves to be irresponsible or abusive mothers, but after that, I think that sometimes the most merciful solution would be to spare the child from the miseryof an abusive childhood.

I am pro-choice...pro-choice for choosing to use birth control and pro-choice on whether to have sex or not. Once you make the baby, take responsibility for it by providing it a home with someone else if you can''t do it. It''s totally ludicrous to suggest that to forbid abortion forces the child to be raised by an abusive parent. Unwanted babies can be given up for adoption.

But to answer your question, I have volunteered as a Guardian ad Litem for children in the foster care system, I have been on the board and continue to support a Crisis Pregnancy center, and we adopted a child from China. We have donated to others who wished to adopt. I teach poor children in a high poverty school. Is that good enough to justify my position? (I wouldn''t normally want to list those things, but you sort of forced me to justify my position.) But even if it wasn''t, it doesn''t change the fact that abortion is killing an innocent human being. I think it is very dangerous to play God by deciding who is worthy to live or not. And not only that, I have no more responsibility than anyone else to take care of the orphans and neglected children. Being pro-abortion does not absolve one of taking care of the orphans and hungry in this world. We have abortion freely available in the US, yet there are still needy children. So I hope the pro-abortion people are stepping up to the plate as well. The needs are great even WITH "choice".

 

[vespergirl]

Date: 1/27/2009 7:34:23 PM
Author: diamondseeker2006

Date: 1/27/2009 11:02:18 AM
Author: vespergirl



Just a quick question I have to all the people who are anti-choice: what have you done to help pregnant women who are not prepared to raise their children? Have you adopted any children? Are you foster parents? Do you volunteer your own time and money to help raise unwanted children? If so, then good for you. If not, then please stop telling women that they need to give birth to children that they cannot raise. I, for one, am tired of seeing my tax dollars go to failing programs intended to help these children, but in actuality do little more than perpetuate generational poverty and ignorance. I see so many anti-choice people championing the lives of unborn babies, but then I see very few of them with a houseful of crack babies that they adopted from mothers who would have otherwise chosen to terminate their pregnancies. Unless you are prepared to become responsible for the lives of those children, please don''t dictate other women''s life choices. And yes, I believe that contraception, or even sterilization would be the best choice for some women who have proven themselves to be irresponsible or abusive mothers, but after that, I think that sometimes the most merciful solution would be to spare the child from the miseryof an abusive childhood.

I am pro-choice...pro-choice for choosing to use birth control and pro-choice on whether to have sex or not. Once you make the baby, take responsibility for it by providing it a home with someone else if you can''t do it. It''s totally ludicrous to suggest that to forbid abortion forces the child to be raised by an abusive parent. Unwanted babies can be given up for adoption.

But to answer your question, I have volunteered as a Guardian ad Litem for children in the foster care system, I have been on the board and continue to support a Crisis Pregnancy center, and we adopted a child from China. We have donated to others who wished to adopt. I teach poor children in a high poverty school. Is that good enough to justify my position? (I wouldn''t normally want to list those things, but you sort of forced me to justify my position.) But even if it wasn''t, it doesn''t change the fact that abortion is killing an innocent human being. I think it is very dangerous to play God by deciding who is worthy to live or not. And not only that, I have no more responsibility than anyone else to take care of the orphans and neglected children. Being pro-abortion does not absolve one of taking care of the orphans and hungry in this world. We have abortion freely available in the US, yet there are still needy children. So I hope the pro-abortion people are stepping up to the plate as well. The needs are great even WITH ''choice''.

Diamondseeker, I think it''s great that you give back. My mother is also a social worker and guardian ad litem in an impoverished area, and hearing the stories of her experiences with abused and neglected children greatly influenced my opinions. She also became pro-choice after being exposed to the community she lives in after years of being against abortion because of her religion. My husband and I are also donors to Save the Children, and we sponsor a child in Mozambique as well. I just wish that all children were wanted and properly cared for.

I agree that the parents choices should be to use birth control or abstain from sex. But then it should be my choice to not have to pay taxes that go to their welfare checks, so that they can raise kids who make the same crappy choices, and then I end up paying for their illegitimate children as well. They can choose to be poor & have kids, but then they can also figure out how to support them without welfare.

Just a few more questions, though - do you think that doctors and women who decide to terminate pregnancies that endanger the life of the mother are playing God? In that sitution, who''s life is more important - the mother''s or the fetus''? Also, are you in favor of the death penalty for criminals?

 

[vespergirl]

Date: 1/27/2009 7:34:23 PM
Author: diamondseeker2006

Date: 1/27/2009 11:02:18 AM
Author: vespergirl



Just a quick question I have to all the people who are anti-choice: what have you done to help pregnant women who are not prepared to raise their children? Have you adopted any children? Are you foster parents? Do you volunteer your own time and money to help raise unwanted children? If so, then good for you. If not, then please stop telling women that they need to give birth to children that they cannot raise. I, for one, am tired of seeing my tax dollars go to failing programs intended to help these children, but in actuality do little more than perpetuate generational poverty and ignorance. I see so many anti-choice people championing the lives of unborn babies, but then I see very few of them with a houseful of crack babies that they adopted from mothers who would have otherwise chosen to terminate their pregnancies. Unless you are prepared to become responsible for the lives of those children, please don''t dictate other women''s life choices. And yes, I believe that contraception, or even sterilization would be the best choice for some women who have proven themselves to be irresponsible or abusive mothers, but after that, I think that sometimes the most merciful solution would be to spare the child from the miseryof an abusive childhood.

I am pro-choice...pro-choice for choosing to use birth control and pro-choice on whether to have sex or not. Once you make the baby, take responsibility for it by providing it a home with someone else if you can''t do it. It''s totally ludicrous to suggest that to forbid abortion forces the child to be raised by an abusive parent. Unwanted babies can be given up for adoption.

I also wanted to reply to the above highlighted comment. From what I have seen amongst adopting couples, healthy white and Asian babies are highly desired. However, you don''t see as many people reaching out to adopt black, Hispanic, disabled or older children. Why are so many people going to Eastern Europe and China to adopt babies, while so many black, Hispanic, disabled and older American children languish in foster care? I think that this is a very sad situation. So, even though unwanted babies can be given up for adoption, it seems that there are many American children who don''t get adopted and spend their lives shuttled from one foster home to another, until the system spits them out, without a family or support system, at age 18.

 

[diamondseeker2006]

Date: 1/27/2009 7:44:55 PM
Author: vespergirl

Diamondseeker, I think it''s great that you give back. My mother is also a social worker and guardian ad litem in an impoverished area, and hearing the stories of her experiences with abused and neglected children greatly influenced my opinions. She also became pro-choice after being exposed to the community she lives in after years of being against abortion because of her religion. My husband and I are also donors to Save the Children, and we sponsor a child in Mozambique as well. I just wish that all children were wanted and properly cared for.

I agree that the parents choices should be to use birth control or abstain from sex. But then it should be my choice to not have to pay taxes that go to their welfare checks, so that they can raise kids who make the same crappy choices, and then I end up paying for their illegitimate children as well. They can choose to be poor & have kids, but then they can also figure out how to support them without welfare.

Just a few more questions, though - do you think that doctors and women who decide to terminate pregnancies that endanger the life of the mother are playing God? In that sitution, who''s life is more important - the mother''s or the fetus''? Also, are you in favor of the death penalty for criminals?

Thanks, VG, I am glad you help needy children, too! (I forgot to say we sponsor kids in Haiti and China as well. I think that has been especially meaningful to our kids, as our two grown children now sponsor children on their own.)

The only case I have known of where the mother''s life was truly in danger is when the mother has cancer and continuing the treatment would harm the unborn baby. In that case, I do believe it is between the woman and her husband to decide (with medical advice, of course) whether they can take the risk of postponing treatment to have the baby. I have known of people who stopped treatment and had the baby and the mother eventually died, and another where both mother and baby lived. So I will say I would allow for exceptions when death is likely to occur to the mother if the pregnancy continued. I''d like to think I''d take the chance and allow my baby to live if I was in that position, but I am probably not that noble or brave. Thankfully I was never put in that position, and I would never judge anyone who had that decision to make.

Yes, I am in favor of the death penalty for certain crimes.

 

[E B]

Date: 1/27/2009 7:34:23 PM
Author: diamondseeker2006

I think it is very dangerous to play God by deciding who is worthy to live or not.

Date: 1/27/2009 8:05:46 PM
Author: diamondseeker2006

Yes, I am in favor of the death penalty for certain crimes.

DS- Just out of curiosity (as I also struggle with whether or not I support the death penalty), do you not consider capital punishment to be a process of 'deciding who is worthy to live or not'?

 

[diamondseeker2006]

Date: 1/27/2009 7:51:12 PM
Author: vespergirl

I also wanted to reply to the above highlighted comment. From what I have seen amongst adopting couples, healthy white and Asian babies are highly desired. However, you don''t see as many people reaching out to adopt black, Hispanic, disabled or older children. Why are so many people going to Eastern Europe and China to adopt babies, while so many black, Hispanic, disabled and older American children languish in foster care? I think that this is a very sad situation. So, even though unwanted babies can be given up for adoption, it seems that there are many American children who don''t get adopted and spend their lives shuttled from one foster home to another, until the system spits them out, without a family or support system, at age 18.

Actually we have had friends who were on waiting lists here to adopt black babies, and they eventually went to Haiti because it seems that some social workers are totally against other races adopting black babies. I find that very sad, but certainly the Haitian babies are in more dire circumstances. I think it''s pretty difficult to locate Hispanic babies for adoption as well. In actuality, I think babies of all races would be adopted in this country.

The problem with this system is that they don''t release the children for adoption for several years, and by then, they may have developed serious behavioral and emotional problems due to abuse, neglect, and insecurity from being shuffled back and forth from the parent to foster homes. So by the time the rights are terminated, it is hard to fit them in with a family who already has children, because the child may have behaviors that are not acceptable to expose the exisiting children to. And parents who are childless certainly are not always the best choices to give a child with serious emotional problems because they have not yet had the experience of parenting a relatively typical child (and yes, there are exceptions).

I was very turned off about the foster care system when I was a GaL. It took far too long for children to get out of dangerous homes and get into secure, permanent homes. I finally gave that up and we decided to go adopt a child from an orphanage where we could control their future.

 

[diamondseeker2006]

Date: 1/27/2009 8:12:43 PM
Author: EBree

Date: 1/27/2009 7:34:23 PM
Author: diamondseeker2006

I think it is very dangerous to play God by deciding who is worthy to live or not.

Date: 1/27/2009 8:05:46 PM
Author: diamondseeker2006

Yes, I am in favor of the death penalty for certain crimes.

DS- Just out of curiosity (as I also struggle with whether or not I support the death penalty), do you not consider capital punishment to be a process of ''deciding who is worthy to live or not''?

Ebree, I used to struggle with this, but the beliefs on which I base my moral code says that certain crimes are punishable by death. Generally, that would be premeditated murder, mass murder, etc. Therefore, setting laws where evil is punished seems just to me. Whereas taking the life of an innocent child seems totally wrong to me.

Let me just add that I used to have the view of pro-choice and I said the same exact thing VG did above about people who wasted time picketing clinics rather than taking care of needy children. Once my views were transformed, I really did have to go and do exactly what I had criticized others for potentially not doing! However, I think we all have that responsibility regardless of our views on abortion.

 

[Cellini3]

question I have to all the people who are anti-choice: what have you done to help pregnant women who are not prepared to raise their children? Have you adopted any children? Are you foster parents? Do you volunteer your own time and money to help raise unwanted children? If so, then good for you. If not, then please stop telling women that they need to give birth to children that they cannot raise. I, for one, am tired of seeing my tax dollars go to failing programs intended to help these children, but in actuality do little more than perpetuate generational poverty and ignorance. I see so many anti-choice people championing the lives of unborn babies, but then I see very few of them with a houseful of crack babies that they adopted from mothers who would have otherwise chosen to terminate their pregnancies. Unless you are prepared to become responsible for the lives of those children, please don''t dictate other women''s life choices. And yes, I believe that contraception, or even sterilization would be the best choice for some women who have proven themselves to be irresponsible or abusive mothers, but after that, I think that sometimes the most merciful solution would be to spare the child from the miseryof an abusive childhood.

[/quote]
A quick question, seriously? Why was this really posted?

I''ll bite anyway. I am an adoptive parent to 3 children all domestic. I will attempt to respectfully disagree with your post, especially about the "good for you" and "dictating women''s choices" parts which seem to be at the very least condescending if not outright rude. Standing up and making a difference for what you believe in is often extremely difficult and unpopular, especially in our current society. The PC term is Pro Life, I would greatly appreciate it being used vs anti choice. As with the previous poster, it is not that I am anti choice, in frame of informing women about their choice to abstain from sexual activity, use contraceptives if engaging in sexual activity,screening for STDs, carrying a child to term, raising a child, placing a child for adoption or the risks/procedure details and after procedure counseling of an abortion. These choices are not covered by this policy reversal of the new admin.

Our son has multiple special needs not limited to his being born with Fetal Alcohol Syndrome and drug exposure. One of our daughters, also exposed to drugs has attachment issues. To be cheeky, yes I agree mandatory sterilization for women that repetitively have children, especially pre-birth abuse ie exposure to drugs alcohol should be a consideration...perhaps an option. As far as merciful, that depends on your definition of the term. Would it have been more merciful to have ended my son''s life before he was born? I disagree. So did his birth mother. I think he would disagree too.

No, I don''t think that all of the social programs are bad. I take great offense at my government requiring me to fund via my tax dollars programs that encourage or provide abortions in any capacity. I understand that tax dollars will go to fund either social programs or abortions, I can live with funding social programs that need to be revamped, but not funding programs that go completely against my moral convictions. It must be mentioned that ongoing support to post abortive women is typically provided by Crisis Pregnancy Centers or the church not the actual clinic that provided the abortion. Often women are hurting psychologically as well as physically for years after an abortion procedure, where is the social program for them?

I am not attempting to offend, If I have I''m sorry. I am just so sick of society making those that disagree with popular opinion to be made to look weak, foolish or at the very least a hater. As you can see by me telling a bit of my story that is simply not true. I am no saint, not particularly special or talented. I just love children and this is the call that God has given me.

 

[diamondseeker2006]

Hi, Cellini, welcome to PS!

I try to stay off these kinds of threads because I come here for relaxation and not to debate. However, I do feel like I have to speak up for the ones that cannot speak for themselves, and I am pleased to meet someone else who has that same mindset! I applaud you for adopting children with special needs. Like you, I am incredibly thankful that our daughter was allowed to live.

 

[risingsun]

DS: This post is not in debate to your own. It is my experience from another perspective...

I had a young woman as a patient who had been horribly abused as a child. She was adopted by a loving family, but the damage had been done. She has been trying to hurt herself and has ultimately been attempting to take her life for a number of years. She told me she wishes she had never been born. Her plan is to quietly disappear, one day, and complete her suicide attempt. This young woman, age 20 years old, has been in and out of therapy and inpatient facilities repeatedly during her young life. Her adoptive family's life has been shredded. I have also worked with other abused patients, in their 30's, 40's and older who have made numerous suicide attempts. Some of these individuals will one day succeed. Other of my abused patients have fought their way back to a better life--not without problems, but a better place. Many still struggle on a daily basis to believe that they deserve to have a life. I have seen the generational cycle of abuse, which never seems to end. Someone please tell me what is the solution to this problem. There are so many broken people and some of them can never be made whole.

 

[steph72276]

Hi, there. I usually stay away from these threads, because like DS, I come here to relax and not debate, but I felt like since there are so few of us here either with the same mindset or willing to express our views, I wanted to say I completely agree with DS. I have always been pro life, but through an event occurring in my life last month, I have become more passionate about the subject. I am a mother of 1 who desperately wants another child. I found out I was pregnant in early November and lost the baby 2 days before Christmas. Because of the way it happened, I had to see with my own eyes what a baby looks like at 9 weeks in utero and it is a sight that I will never be able to erase from my memory. It was a tiny, perfect human baby. A baby that had hands and feet and had brainwaves and a heartbeat before it died. I think so many people that have abortions and use abortion as birth control don''t really think of their babies as "real babies", but I don''t know how anyone who has been through what I have been through could say abortion is not murder. I agree with DS when she said we shouldn''t try to play God. I for one am literally sick at the thought of my tax dollars going to murdering these innocent babies. I always hear about the woman''s right to choose...what about the baby''s right to live? I would much rather have my tax dollars spent on contraceptives and education. I am not okay with having my money spent on disposing of innocent babies. I do believe that since I have this view, and feel so passionately about it, that I have an obligation to put my money and my time where my mouth is. I have been in contact with a local pregnancy crisis center and will begin volunteering and also giving financial help. I think people''s viewpoints are shaped by life experiences, and everyone is entitled to their feelings and opinions...this is just mine....

 

[elle_chris]

Many people have personal experiences leading them to choose one side or the other.
For me personally, I had a tubalar pregnancy four years ago. It was caught very early so that my doctor was able to give me a shot saving me from surgery.
In my case, I needed to have three ultrasounds done and it was still unclear. The deciding factor was that I was having severe pain so they didn't want to take a chance.
In a world where choice is taken away, there's an extremely high chance that this type of pregnancy would be forced to continue since neither my doctor nor the second one I saw, could reach a conclusive desicion about the pregnancy even though, chances were pretty high is was ectopic.

I'm sure many people would think, "well, in that type of situation it's obvious it should be terminated".
But when you take the choice away from a woman to decide on whether or not her own health, be it mental or physical be the only decision on what to choose to do about a pregnancy, you're opening up the door for extreme regulation who's primary objective would not be in the interest of the woman. In fact, all she becomes is a vessel without any rights. And when a womans rights get taken away, that to me is very scary.

 

[vespergirl]

Not to any poster in particular, but I just wanted to point out that several posters here said that they hate the idea of the government using their tax dollars to pay for abortions. Yet, perhaps many of you have no problem with the government using your tax dollars to execute people on death row (many of whom were executed though they were proven innocent afterwards), or to murder thousands of innocent Iraqi children and babies for oil.

Why is it OK for the government to play God when it comes to warfare and executions, but not when a woman has been raped, or a mother''s life is in danger?

I have to say that I at least respect the Catholic Church for being unilateral in it''s position on human life. The church opposes abortion, the death penalty and war. To me, anyone who says that abortion is bad but the death penalty and war are A-OK are hypocrites. You either think that the duration of human life should only be dictated by God and never the government, or you don''t. It''s a slippery slope to say that it''s OK for the President to decide to kill Iraqi children but it''s not OK for a crack addict to decide to abort her baby - you can''t have it both ways.

 

[risingsun]

I did not mention, in my prior post, that this very troubled young woman had recently given birth to her own daughter, with whom she was unable to bond. She treated her infant as if she were a doll, to be picked up and discarded according to her mood. Do I think my patient should have had an abortion, I don't know. It was not my choice to make. I do hold my patient's biological parents responsible for having a child, whom they abused and abandoned. They could have made a better choice. Not getting pregant is at the top of my list. I remain pro choice because I strongly believe that every woman has the right to decide what happens to her own body. We have many difficult choices to make for our children at all stages of their lives, whenever we believe that live begins.

 

[NewEnglandLady]

I know this is late in the thread, but I think your question is a good one, Vesper. I'm all for states rights--if a state wants to support the death penalty, that state's taxes can support it. If it's a federal prison, then it's federal money.

I'm always left scratching my head about the war, though. I quoted Article 1, Section 8, Clause 1 of the Constitution earlier and the only thing that is clearly spelled out which should be funded by federal tax dollars is our defense. It's very, very clear to me that it's completely within Congress's jurisdiction to spend federal tax dollars on the war. I personally did not support the war and would prefer to see our defense spending to go elsewhere, however I've never questioned whether we should fund the war...my bigger issue at this point is that we can't AFFORD a war. So I tend to see it from the other side of the fence--I don't understand why everybody is willing to support federal programs that are clearly unconstitutional, but don't understand why tax dollars are funding a war that is clearly spelled out in the constitution.

 

[luckystar112]

Date: 1/28/2009 10:57:09 AM
Author: vespergirl

Why is it OK for the government to play God when it comes to warfare and executions, but not when a woman has been raped, or a mother''s life is in danger?

I don''t think that anyone has said that they are against abortions if a mother''s life is in danger.
That question can go both ways, though. Why do some people believe that it is okay for the government to help pay for abortions in countries other than our own, but are against the death penalty and war, which can also be considered for the "good" of the country/citizen?


One could respond, "No one "LIKES" abortions, but we can see instances in where they would be beneficial to society." I think if you cross out abortion and enter "war" or "the death penalty", it could be the same thing.


I''ll take a stab at an answer for you though. I don''t particularly care for the death penalty--freaks me out. At the same time, since 1976 there have "only" been 1,136 executions in the United States. That is compared to 1.3 million abortions per year in the United States alone. You could also argue that those on death row have had a chance to make choices concerning their lives (compared to an unborn baby). You could also argue that they are afforded a "fair trial" before they are sentenced to death, unlike an unborn baby. So my own personal opinon is that I would choose the death penalty any day over an abortion performed for reasons other than rape, incest, or a mother''s life being in danger.


I think the argument about putting restrictions on abortion thereby "opening the door" to completely take over women''s rights about as silly as the "allowing homosexual marriage means incest and polygamy will be followed!" I think there are ways to do it to make everyone happy, but for political reasons no one will step up to the plate.

 

[Cellini3]

Date: 1/28/2009 10:17:30 AM
Author: elle_chris
Many people have personal experiences leading them to choose one side or the other.

For me personally, I had a tubalar pregnancy four years ago. It was caught very early so that my doctor was able to give me a shot saving me from surgery.

In my case, I needed to have three ultrasounds done and it was still unclear. The deciding factor was that I was having severe pain so they didn''t want to take a chance.

In a world where choice is taken away, there''s an extremely high chance that this type of pregnancy would be forced to continue since neither my doctor nor the second one I saw, could reach a conclusive desicion about the pregnancy even though, chances were pretty high is was ectopic.


I''m sure many people would think, ''well, in that type of situation it''s obvious it should be terminated''.

But when you take the choice away from a woman to decide on whether or not her own health, be it mental or physical be the only decision on what to choose to do about a pregnancy, you''re opening up the door for extreme regulation who''s primary objective would not be in the interest of the woman. In fact, all she becomes is a vessel without any rights. And when a womans rights get taken away, that to me is very scary.

Elle, I too have been in a similar situation. I had a surprise ectopic pregnancy. It is painful and totally sucked.

I also had several ultra sounds/sonos and second opinions as well as severe & debilitating pain. I respectfully disagree with you as this is not considered a termination of a pregnancy. The shot that you received is likely in lieu of an D&C or tubal removal not to terminate the life of your child. Although I am not a dr & cannot know for sure.
If abortion on demand or otherwise were restricted or eliminated thee types of situations would remain unaffected. The baby is not viable, not viable and can never be placed in the womb to become viable. Typically the baby dies early on but your body hormone levels may continue to rise as can the baby''s body remain unabsorbed. & This is not considered a termination of pregnancy nor is it considered to be under the realm of "choice". My baby died @ 6 weeks and we found out after @8 weeks. That was my child, he died and had to be removed from my tube in an emergency surgery so that I could live. I lost my tube and what remained of my baby & fertility that day. It was a hard day I beat myself up over that decision as I am prolife, however this is not to forget the life of the mother..in fact research proves that in less than 2% of cases (that is adding a (.05%)abortion was an option to either save the mother''s life or the result of rape/incest.

I do know your pain and the uncomfortableness of the situation of ectopic pregnancy, it is not a choice situation. Your baby is dead or dying and the time is ticking to save you. If you or anyone else harbors guilt/shame from a ectopic pregnancy it is false. You had no choice and you were not at fault. I say this because I struggled to come to terms with my beliefs and what happened to my own child. There was no choice and there was no abortion, but there was in fact a child.