[FoRK] Re: thinking about responsibility
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
> The problem I have with this way of thinking is that their is a
> responsible choice- give the child up for adoption.
Is this actually a viable option? I don't know anything about the
process. I thought there were tons of kids waiting for adoption, so
you'd be adding to an already-burdened system.
Also, I'm assuming that you think the various costs associated with
a baby to term is part of being responsible (which is why you
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
pregnancies - no energy, loss of mental alertness, no sex drive, loss
appetite because you have aversions to everything you used to like),
social demension of everyone knowing you're pregnant and giving the
(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
as possible, given that I've never been in this situation.
FoRK mailing list
More information about the FoRK