If Roe Vs. Wade Were Overturned, Who Would Care For The Unwanted Babies?
Posted on 25. Nov, 2009 by in Q&A
I don’t mean the pretty, pink-skinned, healthy ones. I mean the darker-skinned ones, plus of course the crack babies, abused infants, prostituted teens and others who then grow up to perpetuate the problem. Or do we just pass a law against them, too?
Seriously, though, what is the religious right’s answer to the question of unwanted and/or abused children that would arise from “life begins at conception” social policies?
WP Autoblogging Plugin
Nov 25th, 2009
It is very easy to say that life begins at conception. To abort the pregnancy in their view is murder. Abortion has existed for thousands (or even tens of thousands of years?) years. To expect it to disappear is naive. Those that are against abortion are those that do not have any responsibility regarding the child that is conceived and eventually born. They are not the ones that must care for that child in all the ways we would expect he or she to be cared for. They are not financially or emotionally involved with the life of that child. The prospect of abortion should be the sole concern of the mother (and father if present) with the advice of their doctor. Being pregnant and carrying a child for 9 months is the most personal thing a woman can go through. Why should anyone be able to tell her what she must do with her own body? It is very easy to be so self righteous when you are totally devoid of any responsibility and it is an academic exercise for you.
wierdeye
Nov 25th, 2009
A lot of you people think that the guy and his Parents aren’t at fault here.Many pregancies are not oneside. The guy also is at fault also the parent and the Grandparent and the Great Grandparent who thinks that Johnny is a quite ladies man because he is haviing sex with dozens of young girls down the street.
The problem isn’t crack babies or unwanted children killing theese kids will not stop unwanted pregnancies.
We need to stop encouraging teen sex also the adults need to act like an adult and if not married or not ready to have children don’t have sex.
Our problem isnot the unborn or foster care it is taking control of ourselves and realize there is a consquences to our actions.
STOP having sex until ready to take care of your baby.
Change Sucks
Nov 25th, 2009
So we just ignore holding adults accountable, including their sexual behavior? Killing a baby should not be justified by any means, especially this argument. The PARENT who CHOOSES to have sex should be the one who takes care of the baby. If they don’t, then the law should be enforced for neglect…
I’m sorry, but as the cliche little phrase goes-two wrongs do not equal a right. Why should we tolerate abortion because women don’t want to be responsible for their actions? I’m sick to death of all these side arguments that ultimately hold women to the same standard/level as a preschooler-that we aren’t really able to control ourselves so when consequences come, instead of being held accountable, oh no, we have an out-in this case, one that ends a life in a very violent way…
Andy S
Nov 25th, 2009
The answer is orphanages, foster and adopted parents and in some cases no one. If the decision were overturned and women could no longer obtain an abortion don’t you think that would decrease the pregnancy rate and therefore the amount of unwanted babies that might otherwise have been aborted? Isn’t that a positive also? It’s not as if there aren’t advantanges and disadvantages to each side of the issue my partisan friend. There is no perfect solution in either case. What is morally right to do is not necessarily what is most economically or socially beneficial.
ahottmes
Nov 25th, 2009
If it were overturned the question would be who would pay for all the funerals of the pregnant women getting illegal abortions from quack doctors or trying to give themselves one with a metal hange and died from infection and bleeding. Then who would pay for the jail term for doctors still performing them.
And who would bury all those children who would be left in garbage cans and dumped b/c the Moms couldn’t care for them and had nowhere to go.
J C
Nov 26th, 2009
First off I would say the parents. While I appreciate your argument the killing of unwanted children is not the answer. Perhaps we should use profiling to determine which persons are apt to be unfit parents and sterilize them. This would include males that are willing to sow the seed but not reap the harvest. Thereby stopping unwanted pregnancies and no more abortions.
ducky
Nov 26th, 2009
honest (But Harsh Truth) answer :
that all depends on the color of their skin.
sorry, but that’s the way it is.
white babies get adopted, black babies more often than not Don’t.
———————-
all of you who said they would take them
LIARS !
there are Thousands of unwanted black babies that need homes Right Now !!
and no one is talking them.
frigging hypocrites !!!!!
Most all of them are crammed into sh*tty foster homes with almost no hope of ever getting adopted as I type.
Then the boys grow up and they fill our prisons !!
Stormcha
Nov 26th, 2009
It should not be the responsibility of government Nor should Taxpayers have to pay anything more for it. If they don’t care about their own flesh and blood, those children will become property of the state and some are proposing they become “Lab Rats” for medical and social experimentation because, even after birth are not recognized as their own person or Viable.
60 min man
Nov 26th, 2009
maybe the prenancy rate would go down if it were illegal. and i do not see murder as an option to having children.if women just made better choices regarding casual sex the rate would drop by the thousands. choose not to get pregnant instead of using abortion as a form of birth control. and my aunt took in over 80 special needs children as a foster parent for 40 years or so and all that did not get adopted she kept in her home. family reunions are always fun with about 8 now grown ups and their new families. and many of the other kept in touch with her until she passed last year.
Plumber Rock
Nov 26th, 2009
Who takes care of them now? We all would. Perhaps you think killing them off is the solution. Perhaps if you get too old, you should be eliminated. Perhaps if you get too sick you should be eliminated. Perhaps if you are the wrong color, you should be eliminated. Get the idea. No, I thought not.
Your Raw Food Life
Nov 26th, 2009
if you have such a child and are thinking of killing it, i will take it.
perhaps you all are right and they are better off dead. but they can decide that for themselves after growing up. doesnt that make more sense than you imposing that “choice” on them.
amnesty sucks
Nov 26th, 2009
There are many childless couples that want to adopt babies. It is difficult to adopt.
However, Roe v. Wade will NEVER be overturned!
Spain mortgages
Nov 27th, 2009
We would need to do what every conservative loves to do out of the goodness of their hearts.
Increase spending on social programs.
Gypsy Wolf
Nov 27th, 2009
I’m thinking people like me who want to adopt at least one child would gladly take care of those children. Also, people who cannot conceive would be very happy to take them.
Darling J
Nov 27th, 2009
Well, if the so-called religious nutjobs had their way, you KNOW gays wouldn’t be “allowed” to adopt them.
FYI: I’m a Christian.
Forget War Buy More
Nov 27th, 2009
The state in unfit conditions.
Aegis of Freedom
Nov 27th, 2009
The parents. I know, it’s shocking that the people that made the child should take responsibility for it.
america first
Nov 27th, 2009
You make it sound like the world would be over run by unwanted babies! You really think that little of your fellow man?
Helios
Nov 28th, 2009
We’d haul them to the Republican Headquarters and leave them there. They LOVE BABIES SO MUCH!!!
Mopar Muscle Gal
Nov 28th, 2009
more unwanted babies would be left to die in dumpsters
Badash
Nov 28th, 2009
Republicans. I’m sorry but that’s honestly the only thing I could come up with.