Abortion VS. Adoption

Mhm, I feel the same way you do.
I get what she meant, that it would be more threatening to underage kids and it would hopefully deter them from sex/unsafe sex because they would not have such easy access to abortions. However, like I said, it all comes down to maturity. You can get a really immature 25 year old, or a mature 15 year old. So age is not the best indicator to use in this case.

 

Abortion is wrong and yet in the Bible, God does the biggest out of the womb abortion ever, by killing the Egyptian first born male babies after having the Jews paint lamb blood over their doors to mark they aren't to be hit. He also orders people to go to war and kill the men, women and children of places while only keeping the 'virgins' or those 'without men' so that the Jews can have them. I'm sorry but the Bible is the last reference I would use to support the issue of Adoption over Abortion. Also, on a last note, there were rules that if women were raped in the past or unchaste, they were to be killed for being defiled or impure. There are so many ways the Bible and the monotheistic followers have all dealt with unwanted pregnancy. We are in a new age so lets use modern day issues, even though in some areas women are still stoned to death for being raped in parts of the world. I don't see also where Jesus supported women having babies out of wedlock either. He gave support to a woman for having a job as a prostitute, as if she had a super choice till he came along, but she also had NO children so really, Jesus didn't seem to touch on this issue either.

Now onto the other thing that bothers me and I hope you will all (who read this long thing) give this a chance to be said because I feel it is important and though some touch on it, no one is coming out and saying it as I will now. It is the mother's choice, but fathers too need to think so I think it should have been reworded to say would -you- get an abortion or give up -your- child for adoption instead of having the poll be so general as to say people have a right to decide whether someone else does it. There are people here that have not gone through the experiences of life yet where they are living out of their homes and facing a life of poverty, no support from parents on the issue, rape, being taken advantage of at a young age and getting pregnant, sickness that won't allow a female to carry a child or her health is at jeopardy, an oops the condom broke mistake etc. I think each individual person's opinion matters when it comes to that person, but why is it anyone else's right to condemn another person's decision? There ARE reasons to get abortions and anyone who makes the choice IS being responsible, despite the opinion to the contrary.

In nature, animals abort young or get rid of them for a variety of reasons. Human women have to make the choices too. If conditions are not met to raise a child or even have it successfully, adoption just may not be the option here. I agree with others that feel it shouldn't be used as a form of 'birth control', although I will adamantly say I support things such as the 'day after pill' because it does catch things early at the beginning of possible conception. However, the only people using it as a form of birth control tend to be those working in the 'sex' industry, such as prostitutes. Others tend to have reasons why they do it. Pregnancy is expensive. Parents are not always supportive and it can take young women out of school or work. Some men are not supportive or they are too young to readily get a job. Women or girls that come of age to have a kid and can't have any kind of support are alone. Pregnancy with the proper medical follow ups and taking the required vitamins etc can cost over 6000 dollars. Adoptions at best usually might give a mother 2000 dollars, and in many cases, the woman doesn't get anything. The government will help out new mothers to pay for the cost of having a baby if conditions are met but it takes a while to get approved for this support and if the mother has no family support, she may be living in very harsh conditions. Even if she -wanted- the kid, she's going to know that it's become a very hard world and she would more than likely be forced to give up the child because she knows she can't support it. Also, after all that work, she may just want the child but has no way to give it a good life, so all that work she spent having the child, and something will happen to possibly take that child away because she's not in the right economic group. So, she may opt for abortion for that too, because why give up something she's not ready for and give it to someone else? Her life is still screwed.

I think this is not a bad question in one way, because it does make people think if they were in the choice could they make it? I think it's also very admirable if a woman/teen girl can make the choice to have a kid and do their best to care for it and if needed, give it up for adoption. I find abortions after a certain point to be rather disgusting as a kid can survive outside of the womb with help at 7 months or even 6 months if lucky in an incubator. I won't say I like the practice of abortion. However, I think it defies nature and common sense to totally eliminate it. As I mentioned before, babies do NOT all get adopted. Most adoptions are by white people and they don't often choose babies of other ethnicities. If a baby is born and no one wants it, and it is not taken in the first year, it becomes less likely as it ages that it is going to be adopted. It will be in orphanages and/or foster homes all its life. You cannot assure where your child ends up unless two parents slide up right away saying they will take it. This -is- a reality. Orphanages exist. They wouldn't exist at all if children were being taken and adopted. Also, there are scams with foster care for kids and adoptions where some people have taken in these kids and use them for slave labor and government checks. There is no way to assure that your child you just sent off somewhere and wrote off ALL responsibility on is going to somewhere better. And what if that family that the fortunate child ended up with is less than ideal? There is a lot of child abuse out there etc.

So many issues in this were not raised or discussed and I think people ought to know them because often Pro Life people do not come out and say this stuff. They teach kids and others that there is a loving set of arms of some woman that maybe can't have her own kids and a loving father who has a steady job etc waiting there for any child that is brought in to an orphanage. They show pictures of babies and say 'how could you kill this baby with beautiful blue eyes' after the fact it is conceived. They show pictures of aborted fetuses to gross people out. They -never- though show the grim side of a woman's choice and the reality of how these children they give up may live their lives because the woman gave it up for adoption. And the woman has no real rights to the child at all anymore to check that the child is doing well, and if it isn't, well, her chances of doing something about it are close to nil. In either adoption or abortion there's no real turning back.

So, yeah, I find abortion to be a very harsh thing, sure, but life is harsh. There are no guarantees either way that you are doing the better thing. Also, some people use the excuse of 'the baby could have been the next Mozart or Picasso etc. What if the baby is the next Charles Manson or Hitler? No one likes to say these things but these are a reality too, though of course there's no predicting how a kid is going to turn out, so in the end, it is a silly thing to bring up by Pro Lifers. I think that people answering the question for themselves is important and so I won't say what someone else did as far as this being a question that is 'above teens' who answer here but I think it should be a more personal question as in 'would YOU give up the child, abort or for men, would you do whatever you could to support the child or want it adopted or aborted? Then I think the reasons why are important to each person. It makes this less ugly because we all are forced to think suddenly for just us as if it is happening to us and it doesn't involve the rights of other people. As much as I personally would want to do whatever I could if I'm caught in the scenario, I'd say I don't like the options of adoption or abortion where I'd be concerned. I find both to be something on the less favorable side than trying to take care of the kid. However, if a real conundrum came up, I am not sure what I'd push for out of the two options because wow, it's not really in me to want either of those choices. It's up to the woman and I'd probably say if she didn't want it, I'd take it myself and pay for her to go through what she has to. But not all men are like that. Responsibility is something a lot seem to think comes with adoption but it also comes with abortion and even more so, with raising the child itself and giving yourself to that duty.

Sorry if I offended people, but we are missing some of the most sincere reasons here on why people get abortions over adoption at times and though you yourselves may opt to go the other way, it is a very personal choice and I don't think others should just be labeled as horrible people for choosing abortion. I can see why both are done. The world is really less than ideal and I'm not saying that people -should- choose abortion over adoption but I cannot condemn or dislike the person for doing so. The pretty pictures done by Pro Life people are lies just as Pro Choice people down play things. There should be no misconceptions so that we can each answer the question of this with all of the information instead of just one side.

 

OR.....that they just dont' care about trivial things like who your biological parents are......

 

Trivial things?
I'd think knowing who your biological parents are is pretty important. A few of my good friends are adopted, and they want to know who their parents are.
Except...they're under 18, and can't know until then.

 

Totally adoption all the way!

 

Well pro-choice really implies that it's the women's choice as to what she can do. I believe adoption should be understood to be under the pro-choice category as it still is a choice. If someone wants to go through all the trouble of carrying a kid and giving it to another person or people that really want one and can't conceive a child on their own, then more power to them. In contrast I can understand if someone doesn't want to go through carrying an unwanted child, especially if it's the result of rape. It's easy to take a blatant extreme position though when you're detached from the topic at hand.

 

Very well said. People do often seem to think Pro-choice refers to the right to abort a child. It also means the right to let the mother decide if she wants to give the child up for adoption, get assistance to raise the child herself etc. It gives a woman options. I applaud this comment.

 

Personally, I am horrified by the idea of abortion. I believe that a child does deserve a life, and it's not up to anyone else to take that away.

However, I believe that people should be allowed the option of having an abortion, if that's what they really want.

 

Both Adoption and Abortion is for the parent (mainly women) to decided... what would happen if a teenage girl.. unfit to take care of a child... scared of what her boyfriend/family will do falls pregnant.. then abortion will be her only option wouldn't it?

Adoption is probably the nicest thing you can do for a child... i mean giving the kid a loving family... what could be wrong with that? plus they also can find there birth parents

 

Kinda seems like you're saying two completely opposite ideas...which is your point??

For that first bit, it is just plain irresponsable for the families of both parties to NOT be informed of what happened. Adoption is the option.

 

For one thing, is a girl does not want to have a baby, then why get pregnant? If a girl got pregnant and she thought she would not be a fitful mother, I think she should give it up for adoption instead of having an abortion. Abortion is just plain murder. Even though it is not born yet, the baby is still a human being. And with adoption, the baby can be adopted into a family that could take care of it.

So I think adoption.

 

The only reason people are so heated on this subject is because it involves "killing children". Putting it that way, of course people will be against it. But many women have abortions to:
.To save the life of the pregnant woman. Saving a life by ending a life. ;) Tit for Tat
.To preserve the woman's physical or mental health
.To terminate pregnancy that would result in a child born with a congenital disorder that would be fatal or associated with significant morbidity
.To selectively reduce the number of fetuses to lessen health risks associated with multiple pregnancy
Basicially, I do think people are exgagerating when they it's "murder", or whatever. If it's something like the reasons I listed above, it's not wrong. But if it's something like the woman does'nt want to raise a kid, she should in fact put the kid up for adoption.

 

this may sound super crude and insensitive but.....................

i think they should abort or the pill one day after, because abortion ,doesnt really kill anything ,well maybe a mass with no thought or mind or thinking

without that were just flesh,and nothing more


i know it sounds cold-hearted,but a baby not born has no logical thought, they should abort in the first month ,after 7 they shouldnt........

 

I would just like to say that sometimes it isnt the mothers choice to have sex. Rape is also something that can happen in this world, I believe more so now than a years ago.

I do believe it should be the mothers choice, though if a mother had sex knowing that this could be a possibility, she seriously should be more careful than just having an abortion. In the words of my mother "Well if someone raped you, they are probably half crazy, and therefore your baby would have half the genes of a crazy person."

So yes, the mother should have the choice, but she should talk it out with family/

 

wow... that is very cold hearted... the "mass" that your refering to, is what you were once... it is a person... unless what your saying is that you weren't a person when you were in your mother's womb... right?

 

Well we don't just define a person as being a mass of cells. When you were a fetus, did you think? Were you aware? Did you feel? You only know you started out as a ball of cells after the fact and you only knew that you were a person until after the fact.

 

whether you know your a person or not is irrelavent to this conversation. the semen getting to the egg is what makes a person...

 

The semen merely fertilizes the egg, which divides and eventually becomes a person. The main argument for anti-abortion is that a soul is present at conception, if that's what you're trying to aim for we can gladly start again. But saying that the difference between a sole group of cells (blastocyst) and a fully functional human individual is negligible means nothing in the context of this debate. And since when was self-awareness not key to our own identity as individuals? If you were born without any of your five senses making it impossible for you to be aware of anything, including yourself, how would you know you exist? Thought and awareness relies on extracting information from referencing ourselves in the world, without it we have nothing.

 

not knowing that you exist, does not stop you from existing. that was what i meant to say and i know how a person becomes a person. and having the five sense is key to our identity but saying that becuase they don't know they exist is reason enough to kill them?

 

That is a highly abstract argument that is in fact far too complex for anyone to make a full judgment on without completely knowing what and who they are dealing with.

If you would like to get complex like that then let's start arguing about whether it even matters to society or to anyone except the mother at all. It's their choice; it is obstructive and arrogant to say they shouldn't have that choice. If they knew they were going to get pregnant then they should seriously try to do adoption if it is consciously hard for them to handle the irresponsibility of having an abortion. On the other hand it's the woman's choice, not yours. The whole religious, conception idea has nothing to do with this at all because it doesn't make any foundation on reality and has no logical theory behind it. This is why I keep saying it is not up to men, it is up to women. Always up to women. It's them, not anyone else. If they want to have an abortion then fine, if not, that's also fine. What truly disturbs me is individuals thinking they know something about it and start forcing adoption down the throats of other individuals. This is absurd because they are placing elitism towards a personal opinion over someone else's.

I voted pro-choice. Should always be an option. Constitutional or not, it is something that should be open if it comes down to the fact a person cannot physically or psychologically handle giving birth.