Why aren't people who are intensely Pro-Choice more often offering to pay bills of the non-aborted children?

Question

We hear a lot of idealism coming from these people's mouths, but not a great deal of realism. Why aren't they as quick to offer to fit the bills of raising these children until 18- as they are to offer moral criticism to others?

Answer 1

I have often asked the same question, myself.  Misanthrope makes a good point.  Pro-lifers are more concerned with the birth of a human than the life of a human and it's hypocritical.  Their typical, narrow-minded views won't allow them to see the big picture.

Max Power --- Your source for your information is completely biased.  Besides, how does one define donating to charity?  What about liberal -headed households who are actually run by people who have built careers (educators, social workers, medical caregivers) out of catering to their fellow human beings?  These people may not donate to charity but spend all of their energy and accept lower paying jobs just to make this world a more charitable place.  Your typical, narrow minded view won't allow you to see the big picture.

Answer 2

I am the child of a 15 year-old mother who chose to give me up for adoption. My pro-life parents paid for all of my bills until I turned 18, and now I (a pro-life woman) am finishing graduate school, all the while paying for my own bills. When my 17 year-old sister-in-law found out she was pregnant, my husband and I supported her decision to keep the baby.  We have also helped her financially, and will always be there if she needs  our support. Oh, btw, I'm half Hispanic, so my adoptive parents don't fit your silly stereotype of only wanting white babies. As a representative of pro-choice, I ask you: have I done enough to justify my existence?  

Answer 3

Didn't notice that you said Pro-Choice; did you mean pro-life?

I just saw on the news this story about how the number of kids in the foster system has almost tripled.  Most kids end up in the system because of abuse or they are abandoned because they have a handicap.  Its sad and I am sure each one of them is wonderful but I also think each one deserved better then this.  Maybe if someone had thought I shouldn't have this soul then it would have gone to someone more desirable.

I have asked your question before because it makes sense but most pro-lifers only care that the baby is born; they don't care what kind of life they are going to have.

Just because you have s*x does not mean you are old enough or responsible enough to deal with the consequences.  However that is usually the route that the pro-lifers take.  Its sad.  Hey Jennifer check out just a few adoption/orphan sites and you will see how well people do at taking care of those kids.

If you are going to convince women not to have an abortion, you should be responsible enough to deal with the consequences.  So all you pro-lifers should be adopting all these kids before they are 18 so that they can have a family.  After all it was the pro-lifers who insisted the right thing was for these children to be brought in to this world.  They don't seem to care that anyone can have babies but not everyone should.

Answer 4

Because then people would get pregnant just to get rich.  Oh, wait they already do that.

Also, there is a long waiting list for people to adopt.

Answer 5

I think you must mean, pro-life. I'm pro choice, I believe that the option is there, its safe and reasonably cheap (although it can add up over time). The law states that it is the woman's right to choose this option.

I do think that there is an imbalance there, the option of a responsibility abortion should be given to men.

This will encourage more personal responsibility.

Do people really do that, oppose abortion and oppose paying child support in the same breath?

Answer 6

While I personally see and agree with the point you are raising, I'll be interested to see if this question lasts the day...

Answer 7

Do you mean Pro Life??

other wise I dont get it.....

you might like this...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MrXvDXVhq...

"Chickens are good People!"

Answer 8

My husband and I offered to adopt the baby of a woman who was pregnant.  That would have included covering the pre-natal care.  She chose to abort her baby rather than deal with a pregnancy.

Please don't use money as the exclusive excuse women give.  Abortions don't always have to do with money; the "problem" is the mother being inconvenienced.

RU-486, quit generalizing.  Many pregnant women who abort their babies aren't crack addicts.  The woman we wanted to adopt from wasn't.

Answer 9

You have your facts wrong, pro-lifers are usually conservative and conservatives give more money to charities than liberals.

" Although liberal families' incomes average 6 percent higher than those of conservative families, conservative-headed households give, on average, 30 percent more to charity than the average liberal-headed household ($1,600 per year vs. $1,227).

-- Conservatives also donate more time and give more blood."

Chris- thank you for the insult.

You want a diffrent link that is AKA unbiased

http://abcnews.go.com/2020/story?id=2682...

The fact remains the same, conservatives make less then liberals and yet give more to charity.

Answer 10

I guess there is such a thing as personal responsibility,and if you are old enough and responsible enough to be having s*x you should be old enough and responsible enough to understand the consequences. Abortion is a serious and personal issue,it should be done for reasons other than we can't afford a baby. Adoption is done for we can't afford a baby. Someone else will foot those bills

Answer 11

Many of them are.  They would like to adopt them and pay all their bills but there's a baby shortage.

http://encyclopedia.adoption.com/entry/b...

Answer 12

I see what you're saying. It makes no sense at all.