|
|
Post by Smiley on Oct 9, 2004 22:47:51 GMT -5
This could all be fair and true for some orphanages, but those of third-world countries are a completely different story. Most children are severly neglected. There's so many that they can't afford to keep them all well-kept. And since people would rather have their own child or adopt from America, these children still go ignored. I say let's take better care of the children that are already here before bringing more into the world. Yea, I guess I'm a cold-hearted scoundrel for saying so, but that's how I feel and I don't care if anyone thinks of me badly for having those opinions. I mentioned I was radical. I see where you're coming from, and I share your sympathies. America is not a third-world country, however. We have easy access to many types of birth control, we are being educated on the effects of sex (to a point, at least), and we have many safe, effective, and humane alternatives to abortion. In third-world countries, however, all children probably have similar lifestyles, regardless of whether they live in an orphanage or with their biological parents. The horrors they face are shared by all of the citizens - lack of food, water, and medicines. I agree that it would be wonderful for more people to adopt from suffering countries, but I don't think that will happen any time soon. Especially with all of the threats of terrorism in recent years, it takes a lot of time, energy, and paperwork to save just one child. Why should new parents force themselves to go through all the preparation, when there are plenty of children right here at home who need our care and attention as well? Children a world away are not being passed up for adoption because we're being selfish or haughty - it's just not safe or convenient right now. |
|
|
|
Post by theunorthodox on Oct 9, 2004 23:24:56 GMT -5
Well, I am not, and have not been, just talking about America. This is an issue in other countries as well. America has it really good compared to the rest of the world and I try my best never to forget that.
I don't know about everyone else, but if I had truly wanted a child that badly and had the financial resources to care for one, I'd be willing to go through a little frustration and inconvenience for one.
And I'd like to add again that I don't need the right for myself. I'd never get an abortion, because I'm abstinate. I believe sex causes more problems than anything else in the world. And it's all just because it 'feels good', which is also the number one excuse for drug use and alcoholism, but I've had friends in tight spots and I don't think a child should be used as a 'punishment' on them for their stupid actions....and women around the world have complications where it becomes necesary...
|
|
|
|
Post by Smiley on Oct 9, 2004 23:40:43 GMT -5
Well, I am not, and have not been, just talking about America. This is an issue in other countries as well. America has it really good compared to the rest of the world and I try my best never to forget that. I still believe that abortion is wrong, no matter where it happens on earth, no matter how "necessary" it may be. I do understand that it is hard to bring a child into that sort of world, but does that justify killing it? (this isn't aimed at you directly, just a general statement) True... but also, people who have worked to hard to gain such financial resources, a nice home, a nice job, a nice life, etc., have probably done so in pursuit of a dream they may have had for a long time, such as marrying the person they love and having children together that are their own kin, have the same faults and virtues that they do. It's not that they are against adoption, it's just they have never truly considered it. Like you said, America's got it good and we never really had to worry about saving our children from starvation and disease. It isn't too common that we think about that and actually go and adopt a child. That's good, but humans, as a whole, are very sexual, and sadly they won't stop even when it is best for them and their country is failing. It's very unfortunate, but we can't do much about it. I feel VERY blessed to live in America, and I try my best not to take it for granted. I do see the dangers that they face in third-world countries, but to me, it still doesn't justify abortion. |
|
|
|
Post by theunorthodox on Oct 10, 2004 0:27:04 GMT -5
(I don't feel like I'm being attacked. You don't need to add little things like that at the end. Likewise, I'm not attacking you.)
When the life of the mother is at stake or if the quality of life is just terrible then yes, I think it's better for the child to simply not be born. I'd rather read about a 'drunken mentally disturbed woman with four abortions' than 'a drunken mentally disturbed women with four children dead from neglection'
I've heard stories from women who've described pregnancy as 'being leeched upon by a parasite'. They feel horribly horribly sick, not just within the first few days or weeks like it would be normal, but a month or two later. They can't sleep, eat, or do anything because of the pain they're going through. Some women just can't handle being pregnant. Imagine going through nine months of absolute torture...There should be an option for them.
One reason why I think it's a much more worth-while industry to go into getting parents to start adopting children rather than advocating against abortion.
I remember hearing somewhere that the life of most women in third-world countries is basically to make babies until you die giving birth to one. And I don't recall the exact statistics, but I remember it being about four out of every ten births result in death of either the mother or the child. Unfortunately for them, they don't have a choice, since birth control and abortion isn't really available.
Eh....I had a more significant point I was going to make, but it's about 1:30am and I'm bushed.
|
|
|
|
Post by Smiley on Oct 10, 2004 17:11:06 GMT -5
(I don't feel like I'm being attacked. You don't need to add little things like that at the end. Likewise, I'm not attacking you.) When the life of the mother is at stake or if the quality of life is just terrible then yes, I think it's better for the child to simply not be born. I'd rather read about a 'drunken mentally disturbed woman with four abortions' than 'a drunken mentally disturbed women with four children dead from neglection' I've heard stories from women who've described pregnancy as 'being leeched upon by a parasite'. They feel horribly horribly sick, not just within the first few days or weeks like it would be normal, but a month or two later. They can't sleep, eat, or do anything because of the pain they're going through. Some women just can't handle being pregnant. Imagine going through nine months of absolute torture...There should be an option for them. Eep... forgot to mention that in EXTREME cases, such as when the mother's life is at stake, then abortion should be an option. Even in the case of a drunk, neglecting mother, however, the children should still be able to live. Many people came from horrible families, living in disgusting and dangerous neighborhoods, and now they make millions each year. Plus, in the worst of cases, police can be dispatched and the children are sent to foster homes. There are so many opportunities for children in those lifestyles, and to me, abortion is not one of them. Basically, I'd rather read about a 'drunken mentally disturbed woman with four children currently in police custody' than 'a drunken mentally disturbed women with four abortons'. They HAVE an option... don't have sex, use a condom, take a pill, etc. If they really don't want to have a kid that bad, then they shouldn't be messing around in the first place. Pregnancy isn't 'torture'... it's a natural part of reproduction, and while it isn't always perfect, think of the perks! I'd love to be rid of menstruation for a year! I bet the morning sickness isn't too pleasant, but still, you can survive pregnancy, and usually in the end it's more than worth it. Fair point, but still, I don't think women should be aborting their children just so that they can adopt from another country. People as a whole will prefer their own children, just as people prefer to design their own homes rather than purchase homes that have already been lived in. I don't think that opposing abortion is helping or hurting the adoption process at all. I still want children to be saved, whether they are in the womb or in an orphanage. If abortions aren't available anyway, then what can we do? It's sad, it's unfortunate, but we have our own problems here with abortion that need to be sorted out. |
|
|
|
Post by theunorthodox on Oct 10, 2004 20:35:37 GMT -5
No, these were serious problems. I guess you haven't read many pro-choice stories, because they go into detail of how horrible the experience was for them. It wasn't just morning sickness (Unless they were particularly severe cases), they were in agony for weeks (As in having terrible stomach pains, headaches, cramps, nausea, fainting episodes, etc). Morning sickness is only suppose to last a little while and it's not supposed to be nearly that serious. Once they got an abortion they felt fine.
The perks? Sure, having stretch-lines, post-pardum depression, weight-gain, mood swings, painful swollen breasts that leak milk all the time, backaches, feeling exhausted, running off to the bathroom every fifteen minutes, painful urination, morning sickness, hot flashes, not to mention any complications that happen to arise are just what I needed to make my life one happy dream. And you can't forget the vaginal scar tissue build up from the episiotomy (or just the natural tearing of the vagina from birth), making urination/sexual intercourse painful for years or even the rest of one's life. I can understand if a woman isn't too excited about those 'perks'.
I guess it could be worth it if you actually like children. (Personally, after going through three rampaging little sisters, one of them being mentally handicapped, I don't. I was a mother for the first ten years of my life and it was *not* my choice. I had no say in the matter, I'm done) But not every woman in the world gets all gooey over children, which is what a lot of pro-lifers like to forget/ignore. And judging that about 80% of all abortions are done by women who are already mothers, children can't be *that* much of a joy.
Yea, I wish that was the case. Cops don't always find these places in time. But whatever, I'll give you that.
What about rape? What about mentally disturbed women who don't know what they're doing? Yea, I don't think people should be having sex without protection or the whatnot either. I totally agree with you there, but mistakes can happen. Condoms break. Girls are stupid and forget the pill. Kids get careless. Does that mean a child and pregnancy should be used as a 'punishment' for them?
Another reason a lot of women aren't too thrilled with the idea of setting their children up for adoption is because a lot of these Opra-esque reunions are happening lately in which poof! Your biological daughter that you gave up for adoption when you were 14 years old has come back and tearily demanded why you abandoned her. Or wants to live with you. Or tries to guilt you into handing over money. I can understand a women wanting to avoid that kind of drama too.
|
|
