[FoRK] Re: thinking about responsibility

Regina Schuman rschuman
Mon Oct 24 11:11:42 PDT 2005


Why, I'd think anyone who claims to be pro-life would JUMP at the chance
to subsidize a woman's pregnancy if it meant saving an unborn's life
.... 

The evangelical movement in America, as large and prosperous and vocal
and unified as it is, *must* have funds set aside to help these "least
of my brethren."  The Bible says to.

>>> "Corinna" <schultz at harlingen.isd.tenet.edu> 10/24/2005 12:43:07 PM
>>>

"Kevin Elliott" <k-elliott at wiu.edu> wrote in message 
news:p06230900bf82b7d08ea7
> The problem I have  with this way of thinking is that their is a
clear 
> responsible choice- give the child up for adoption.

Is this actually a viable option? I don't know anything about the
adoption 
process. I thought there were tons of kids waiting for adoption, so
that 
you'd be adding to an already-burdened system.

Also, I'm assuming that you think the various costs associated with
carrying 
a baby to term is part of being responsible (which is why you
characterize 
abortion as "an easy way to avoid responsibility"). Costs such as the 
physical trauma to the body (not just labor -- carrying a baby is very

expensive to the body in terms of wear and tear, nutritional reserves,

joints, and so forth), difference in quality of life (some people have
hard 
pregnancies - no energy, loss of mental alertness, no sex drive, loss
of 
appetite because you have aversions to everything you used to like),
the 
social demension of everyone knowing you're pregnant and giving the
baby up 
(for some people this can be an enormous amount of social pressure).

Mind, I'm not trying to argue, I'm just wanting to think about this as
fully 
as possible, given that I've never been in this situation.

-Corinna 



_______________________________________________
FoRK mailing list
http://xent.com/mailman/listinfo/fork



More information about the FoRK mailing list