What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

The growing need for adoption (1 Viewer)

Now that Roe v Wade has been overturned...

  • I'm more likely to adopt a child

    Votes: 2 3.6%

  • I'm less likely to adopt a child

    Votes: 2 3.6%

  • My odds of adopting remain unchanged

    Votes: 51 92.7%
  • Total voters
    55
Captain Cranks said:
I've brought this up before, but if you're a Christian and you believe a) a soul is created at conception, b) souls who die as babies go to heaven, isn't being aborted a fast pass to skip this evil world and go right to heaven?
Click to expand...
This is...ridiculous.  

By extension of this ridiculous idea, should Christians just kill everybody to fast pass them right to heaven.  Except, Murder is seen as bad in the Christian faith. And many of that faith view terminating a pregnancy as murder.  

"Thou Shall not kill" and all that.  

Now don't get me wrong.  I don't think Christianity gets to decide for everyone what's right and wrong.  There are a lot of instances where Christians would push someone to keep a pregnancy I don't agree with.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
They might have said it wouldn't reduce demand, but it would certainly reduce abortions. It wouldn't eliminate them, per se, because of illegal ones and abortifacients used illegally, but it would reduce them. 

 
jm192 said:
b) souls who die as babies go to heaven
Click to expand...
Generally, at least in Catholic doctrine, only baptism rids babies of original sin. The sad fact for a long time by dogma is that babies that die before sacraments go to purgatory. If I recall correctly, that is. 

 
I feel like this is meant to be another "in your face you evil pro-life crowd" thread.  

But perhaps this is a chance to consider and fix the big barrier to adoption.  Cost.  

My wife and I have been trying to conceive for a couple of years now.  We're in the midst of IVF.  This will be our 2nd round.  If this doesn't work out, adoption is probably what we're looking at.  

But looking at the cost, I've seen prices ranging from 50K to 70K.  That's a heckuva car.  It's a down payment on a house.  It's a month of gas (haha).  

You've got a thread that quickly became "no one wants these babies."  But the reality is, people want them.  They just can't afford to "purchase" them.  

 
jm192 said:
Genuinely curious:

I was told by multiple people that overturning Roe V Wade wouldn't have a meaningful impact on the number of abortions.  The abortions were going to still happen.  They would just be in a back alley or by self induced injury.  

In the  last 24 hours, I've read how we all need to be ready to pay more for welfare to support these extra babies.  I'm posting in a poll about the increasing need for adoption.  

These two arguments or ideas seem very incongruent.  The number of abortions can't stay the same and the number of babies increase.  

I'm torn on the issue for a lot of reasons.  
Click to expand...
Abortions are still going to happen, but not at the current rate they are, so both things can be true - uptick in more dangerous abortions and a bigger strain on the adoption system.    For me it's not incongruent unless you believe there will be no drop in abortions because of this.    What that difference ends up being will be a reflection of how these states set up their laws and if and what they include as punishments for going to another state.  

 
jm192 said:
I feel like this is meant to be another "in your face you evil pro-life crowd" thread.  

But perhaps this is a chance to consider and fix the big barrier to adoption.  Cost.  

My wife and I have been trying to conceive for a couple of years now.  We're in the midst of IVF.  This will be our 2nd round.  If this doesn't work out, adoption is probably what we're looking at.  

But looking at the cost, I've seen prices ranging from 50K to 70K.  That's a heckuva car.  It's a down payment on a house.  It's a month of gas (haha).  

You've got a thread that quickly became "no one wants these babies."  But the reality is, people want them.  They just can't afford to "purchase" them.  
Click to expand...
You know what else is expensive?  Having a child and being pregnant.    Medical costs, missed work, etc..    I get where you are going with this, but it would be a bit messed up if government stepped in to ease up the cost for the adoptive parents but not for the woman who is now carrying a child she doesn't want.  

 
KarmaPolice said:
You know what else is expensive?  Having a child and being pregnant.    Medical costs, missed work, etc..    I get where you are going with this, but it would be a bit messed up if government stepped in to ease up the cost for the adoptive parents but not for the woman who is now carrying a child she doesn't want.  
Click to expand...
Sure.  

I don't think it has to be either or.  I'm not saying "forget about the pregnant girl or woman."  

I'm just not sure it has to be 50-70,000$ to adopt a child.  It sounds like a lot of the cost of adoption actually comes from covering medical expenses for the birth mother and housing/living expenses.  Surely there's some room to improve both situations.

 
KarmaPolice said:
Abortions are still going to happen, but not at the current rate they are, so both things can be true - uptick in more dangerous abortions and a bigger strain on the adoption system.    For me it's not incongruent unless you believe there will be no drop in abortions because of this.    What that difference ends up being will be a reflection of how these states set up their laws and if and what they include as punishments for going to another state.  
Click to expand...
Sure.

The arguments a month or so back were "You won't see a significant drop in abortions.  Abortions will still happen.  It will just be more dangerous.  But since it won't be a significant drop--is it really worth the risk and cost of these more dangerous abortions?"

You can't NOT have a significant drop and also have a significant increase in babies.  That is incongruent no matter how you slice it.

 
jm192 said:
Sure.  

I don't think it has to be either or.  I'm not saying "forget about the pregnant girl or woman."  

I'm just not sure it has to be 50-70,000$ to adopt a child.  It sounds like a lot of the cost of adoption actually comes from covering medical expenses for the birth mother and housing/living expenses.  Surely there's some room to improve both situations.
Click to expand...
Good point on that part. 

 
jm192 said:
Sure.

The arguments a month or so back were "You won't see a significant drop in abortions.  Abortions will still happen.  It will just be more dangerous.  But since it won't be a significant drop--is it really worth the risk and cost of these more dangerous abortions?"

You can't NOT have a significant drop and also have a significant increase in babies.  That is incongruent no matter how you slice it.
Click to expand...
Ok, but I wasn't saying that.   Not sure how anybody knows how much the # of abortions will drop.   

I think the "more dangerous" will come in if we see significant focus and crackdown of pills getting to states that are now gearing up to ban abortions.   That's were it switches from safer to dangerous - ie they aren't able to get the safer procedure, so they have to have the more dangerous procedure illegally in their state or go elsewhere.  From my reading and people who seem to work in these arenas who post around here - it seems like we are already having issues with our adoption system, and any increase will just cause more issues.   If that is a "significant increase" in babies we will soon find out.  

 
jm192 said:
I feel like this is meant to be another "in your face you evil pro-life crowd" thread.  

But perhaps this is a chance to consider and fix the big barrier to adoption.  Cost.  

My wife and I have been trying to conceive for a couple of years now.  We're in the midst of IVF.  This will be our 2nd round.  If this doesn't work out, adoption is probably what we're looking at.  

But looking at the cost, I've seen prices ranging from 50K to 70K.  That's a heckuva car.  It's a down payment on a house.  It's a month of gas (haha).  

You've got a thread that quickly became "no one wants these babies."  But the reality is, people want them.  They just can't afford to "purchase" them.  
Click to expand...
You can get non-white children much faster and cheaper.

 
shader said:
My beliefs aren’t exactly this, but I don’t believe it’s the absolute end for aborted babies -

I feel the same way about any human that gets killed.  But that still doesn’t make it right to be the one who ends the life.
Click to expand...
According to the belief system of many on the pro-life side there will be a decent number of these non-aborted people who die and go to hell for eternity.  Some of those same people will be put up for adoption or be unwanted and neglected.

 
Cjw_55106 said:
Getting an abortion will not be as difficult as some are trying to make it out to be. Your state may not allow, but your neighboring state likely will.
Click to expand...
I don’t keep up with the states who are putting in restrictions but assuming Florida does something then you know a woman in Central or South Florida will have to go a fairly long way as most of the southeastern states will have restrictions.  What about women in Alaska?

 
AAABatteries said:
I don’t keep up with the states who are putting in restrictions but assuming Florida does something then you know a woman in Central or South Florida will have to go a fairly long way as most of the southeastern states will have restrictions.  What about women in Alaska?
Click to expand...
I guess I’m not sure how your comment goes against mine? I said it’s not as difficult as people are trying to make it out to be. If killing your unborn child requires a day trip, I guess I don’t consider that much of a sacrifice.

 
rockaction said:
Generally, at least in Catholic doctrine, only baptism rids babies of original sin. The sad fact for a long time by dogma is that babies that die before sacraments go to purgatory. If I recall correctly, that is. 
Click to expand...
This is not what I was taught. I was taught something that was called “baptism by blood” that resolved this “loophole.” Or baptism by desire? I forget the name but I think it came out of Vatican 2. 

 
jm192 said:
I feel like this is meant to be another "in your face you evil pro-life crowd" thread.  

But perhaps this is a chance to consider and fix the big barrier to adoption.  Cost.  

My wife and I have been trying to conceive for a couple of years now.  We're in the midst of IVF.  This will be our 2nd round.  If this doesn't work out, adoption is probably what we're looking at.  

But looking at the cost, I've seen prices ranging from 50K to 70K.  That's a heckuva car.  It's a down payment on a house.  It's a month of gas (haha).  

You've got a thread that quickly became "no one wants these babies."  But the reality is, people want them.  They just can't afford to "purchase" them.  
Click to expand...
There’s essentially no cost to foster and adopt. 

 
jm192 said:
Sure.  

I don't think it has to be either or.  I'm not saying "forget about the pregnant girl or woman."  

I'm just not sure it has to be 50-70,000$ to adopt a child.  It sounds like a lot of the cost of adoption actually comes from covering medical expenses for the birth mother and housing/living expenses.  Surely there's some room to improve both situations.
Click to expand...
It doesn’t have to be. And it isn’t. What you’re citing is essentially just the market demand cost for a nearly guaranteed straight from the hospital white baby with no issues in utero. 

 
Captain Cranks said:
Thank you. The world needs more people like you. 
Click to expand...
🤷 not so sure about that, but we try. Hearing and discussing the decision on the drive to the orphanage was an odd experience. Especially when we had an hour to play with the kids that day. I could not look at their faces and think “you’d be better off aborted”. But of course, not every unwanted child is as fortunate as these kids. 
this isn’t as easy an issue as many seem to think. 

 
Cjw_55106 said:
I guess I’m not sure how your comment goes against mine? I said it’s not as difficult as people are trying to make it out to be. If killing your unborn child requires a day trip, I guess I don’t consider that much of a sacrifice.
Click to expand...
It’s not that easy. Especially for people struggling to make ends meet. 

 
Captain Cranks said:
Since we will have more children born into homes that can't afford them or they'll be unwanted, does today's ruling change your desire to adopt?
Click to expand...
My opinion is unchanged - I wasn't adopting before and I'm not now either. Can't afford the kids we had on our own.

 
Does anyone here believe that this decision will increase the amount of adoptions for Down Syndrome babies, or babies with other serious diseases? Because I don’t. 

 
timschochet said:
Does anyone here believe that this decision will increase the amount of adoptions for Down Syndrome babies, or babies with other serious diseases? Because I don’t. 
Click to expand...
I think we're right to assume there would be a significant increase of Down Syndrome babies being put up for adoption. There may possibly be an increase in the NUMBER of such babies that get adopted, maybe, if awareness is raised for the increase need. However, I absolutely believe percentage-wise any increase in their adoptions will lag behind the increase in Down Syndrome babies being born, so the net effect either way is a lower percentage of them will get adopted. Pure speculation at this point, but that's my guess.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Cjw_55106 said:
AAABatteries said:
I don’t keep up with the states who are putting in restrictions but assuming Florida does something then you know a woman in Central or South Florida will have to go a fairly long way as most of the southeastern states will have restrictions.  What about women in Alaska?
Click to expand...
I guess I’m not sure how your comment goes against mine? I said it’s not as difficult as people are trying to make it out to be. If killing your unborn child requires a day trip, I guess I don’t consider that much of a sacrifice.
Click to expand...
Ok so from Miami how long is this "day trip" you've envisioned? Like 16 hours and 1000 miles (each way)?

ETA: I'm expecting all kinds of restrictions in GA, SC, NC, VA, AL, MS, LA, TN, and maybe KY. Is the day trip from Miami to Maryland?

 
Last edited by a moderator:
VandyMan said:
Ok so from Miami how long is this "day trip" you've envisioned? Like 16 hours and 1000 miles (each way)?

ETA: I'm expecting all kinds of restrictions in GA, SC, NC, VA, AL, MS, LA, TN, and maybe KY. Is the day trip from Miami to Maryland?
Click to expand...
I’ve stated my position. I’m not the least bit sad that killing a baby is more of an effort than people want. 

 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

T
Opportunity - The gift our country gives to all
2 3 4
Replies
160
Views
8K
Da Guru
Da Guru
GordonGekko
Hypothetical: Does Japan's Birth Rate Crisis Justify The Permanent Banning Of All Their Abortions? (6/22/22 00:50 PST)
Replies
4
Views
891
Zigg
Z
glvsav37
Where is the Male Image/Role Heading?
2 3
Replies
101
Views
4K
Manster
Manster

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)
Back
Top