Volconvo is a debate forum for the discussion of political, religious, and news-based topics.

prettyredhead · May 5, 2004, 12:14 pm

WHy are there so many homeless kids already in the US>? Abortion eliminated unwanted kids, to avoid foster care. When you dont want the kid, and no ones adopting them, then what should we do>?? Should we have Brazil's embarassment of street children.....is that what the US wants? Street children.
I have pasted a letter I wrote to a local newspaper. They didnt print it, of course, and denied my freedom of speech, but here it is.....
Dear Editor:

I must reply in regard to the abortion opponents outside the local high school, showing extra large pictures of dead fetuses. I am so furious, that I dont know where to begin.
First of all, it was highly innapropriate to take it upon yourself to resort to cheap and tacky scare tactics to scare teen girls. Once the pants are down, the pictures will be forgotten, for one thing, and secondly, it is a very personal decision, to be discussed with a womans doctor. All your message sends is that under no circumstances, should you discuss your pregnancy with anyone, for fear of the anti-abortion fanatics getting wind of it. You should just keep it in, and find a doctor on the sly.
And, finally, I ask this....what do you have to offer the kids who are already born, who are in need of homes this very minute. Is a child over 5 too old to love? If so, you are of questionable character. We know that MOST couples seeking to adopt only want a baby. Any other child will simply not do. A child any older than 3 is too damaged, and a throw away. Is that a fact? Why are there more kids in need of homes, than there are homes? Why are the older, already born kids LESS important than an embryo. What do you have to offer this child, that is unwanted, once it is born>? Will you adopt it, or will it go to the highest bidder? Especially if it is blue eyed, blonde haired? Someone explain to me when we started to place monetary value upon children? Why is it that a newborn can find a home, yet a 5 or 17 year old cannot? Abortion is legal, in no small part, due to the fact that there are half a million already born kids, who need homes first.
Someone please explain to me why this is......then, when you offer a valid alternative for these kids already here, then I will listen to your opposition to abortion.
Christine () () IL

Of course, they will not print this. WHy is it that NO ONE EVER TALKS about this? The travesty that is called foster care and adoptive couples. I say, you get NO CHOICE in age. You are matched to 3 children, some may be babies, maybe not, sort of a lotto. Do you want to be a parent or not? I say, you can deny your matches, 3 times, after that, you will go to the bottom of the adoption list. That seems fair to me and a million foster kids, and older kids.
Elaborate. How can one be so opposed to abortion rights, when they have NOTHING to offer older kids waiting for homes? No one wants to adress it, it is a hidden bais. Lets bring it upfront to talk about.
I think I know why, they see these kids as flawwed and damaged goods. That is why. See, they dont CARE about having a kid, they care about a baby to show off and pretend to their friends that they are "doing good". that is the meat of it. They wont admit this fact, however. If you see these kids as throw aways, like many others, then you dont deserve a child of your own. You cannot love an adopted child, unless it is a baby. This is sick. Completely sick.

Mr.Vicchio · May 5, 2004, 12:50 pm

So what you are saying is that because these children are unwanted, why not end the begging of the unwanted's little lives by just getting rid of them. Another person used to feel the same way, Hitler would be proud his ideals live on in his enemies home land.

prettyredhead · May 5, 2004, 01:04 pm

Hitler has nothing to do with why older kids are less favored than blobs of cells called fetuses.
So, what is your answer MR. Know it all? Ususally your right on top of this.

VXerick · May 5, 2004, 02:06 pm

Quote:

Originally posted by prettyredhead,+--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (prettyredhead,)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>WHy are there so many homeless kids already in the US>? Abortion eliminated unwanted kids, to avoid foster care. When you dont want the kid, and no ones adopting them, then what should we do>?? Should we have Brazil's embarassment of street children.....is that what the US wants? Street children. [/b]

Sorry, but one has nothing to do with the other. In some cases abortion is used as birth control. In many others, women know better but still have sex without any thought of the consequences. Why didn't she use birth conrtol or be sure her partner at least used a condom? To equate homeless kids with lack of abortion is ridiculous. There are few women who don't know from the getgo whether they want to bother with children or are even capable of caring for them. Younger unmarried girls, who come from bad family situations, often want a baby in order to have someone all hers or some other sentimental but silly reason.

As far as I'm concerned, throw away children are a result of a dysfunctional woman and a society that caters to that dysfunction, much as you are doing by blaming any of this on the lack of abortions.

There is a logical but unacceptable solution for most people to unwanted children and that is orphanages. Newt Gingrich suggested it back about 1995 and was thoroughly denounced for it. It surely would be a better alternative than living on the streets.

Quote:

Originally posted by prettyredhead,+--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (prettyredhead,)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> First of all, it was highly innapropriate to take it upon yourself to resort to cheap and tacky scare tactics to scare teen girls. Once the pants are down, the pictures will be forgotten, [/b]

They need more than scared and I doubt the pictures do much to scare them anyhow. The problem is the lack family values and the disrespect for marriage that has become part of our culture since the 60s. The feminists decided women are better than men and that women don't need men, except for sex and sometimes the resultant baby. So women now use men at their whim. Not all women but surely a goodly portion of them and many more as time goes by and this dreadful attitude is becoming prevasive in our society.

Quote:

Originally posted by prettyredhead,
Why is it that a newborn can find a home, yet a 5 or 17 year old cannot? Abortion is legal, in no small part, due to the fact that there are half a million already born kids, who need homes first.
Someone please explain to me why this is......then, when you offer a valid alternative for these kids already here, then I will listen to your opposition to abortion.

Because most people who can't have babies of their own, want the experience of nurturing and raising a child from babyhood to adulthood. They want to enjoy all the stages of growth that goes with a child's progress. They want the memories of those sleepless nights and going through shots, the first tooth, the first day at kindergarten.... the whole thing.

<!--QuoteBegin-prettyredhead,@
Of course, they will not print this. WHy is it that NO ONE EVER TALKS about this? The travesty that is called foster care and adoptive couples. I say, you get NO CHOICE in age. You are matched to 3 children, some may be babies, maybe not, sort of a lotto. Do you want to be a parent or not? I say, you can deny your matches, 3 times, after that, you will go to the bottom of the adoption list. That seems fair to me and a million foster kids, and older kids. [/quote] I don't blame them for not printing it. But maybe they will. Lots of people talk about this all the time. You apparently aren't involved in this except for your particpation in abortion rights. Your whole premise seems aimed at proving abortion is the only solution to unwanted children. I disagree. The only solution is making marriage and the family a top priority again. Now it's at the bottom of most lists. It should be at the top. Our children should be the most important job we ever have. Even in familie where children are wanted and loved, they are often not the top priority. They're maybe in the top ten, but not number ONE where ALl children belong.

<!--QuoteBegin-prettyredhead,
Elaborate. How can one be so opposed to abortion rights, when they have NOTHING to offer older kids waiting for homes? No one wants to adress it, it is a hidden bais. Lets bring it upfront to talk about.
I think I know why, they see these kids as flawwed and damaged goods. That is why. See, they dont CARE about having a kid, they care about a baby to show off and pretend to their friends that they are "doing good". that is the meat of it. They wont admit this fact, however. If you see these kids as throw aways, like many others, then you dont deserve a child of your own. You cannot love an adopted child, unless it is a baby. This is sick. Completely sick.[/quote]

Are you adopted or related to someone who is or to somemone who has adopted a child? How do you know so well that all these people who adopt are after pretending to do good or are showing off? There are people who adopt babies of mixed racial background or those with physical and mental problems. Yes even before they'll adopt a flawed older child. Maybe with the proper love and care, a flawed baby will grow into a great adult. Many of the older throwaways are going to have problems all their lives. It takes a very special person to get involved in that. Unfortunately in our society, there are not a lot of very special persons available.

Yes abortion would rid us of some unwanted children. But not as many as you think. Many women will go ahead and have the baby because of their religion or other reasons and never be good mothers. Not every woman is capable or willing to be a good mother. Then there are mothers who start off ok but due to many reasons, cannot cope with her child or children. Or maybe she is on drugs or is an alcoholic. Or becomes sick.

I have not talked about the role of men and fathers in this. They can be instrumental in either making things better of worse but the decision to have a baby is totally the woman's. And since abortion is something only a woman can have, it's her responsibility to conduct herself so abortion is not a necessity.

VXerick · May 5, 2004, 02:10 pm

Quote:

Originally posted by prettyredhead,
Hitler has nothing to do with why older kids are less favored than blobs of cells called fetuses.
So, what is your answer MR. Know it all? Ususally your right on top of this.

How many older unwanted kids have you taken into your home?

I understand from your description of the unborn, that nothing anyone says here will make one iota of difference to you. Anyone who shows such disrespect for human life as to call it blobs of cells, has not the gray matter to think logically.

prettyredhead · May 5, 2004, 02:45 pm

I have fostered many kids, all ages and races. So, I do not adopt one because I am already raising three alone. I am only one person. If every adoptive family in America, would adopt one child, there would be no need for orphanages. But, since most would rather be child less, than adopt a older child, then........they can go take a long walk off a short pier for all I care.
I have doubts that those who only want babies, are truly sincere. Too bad if they WANT a baby. My lotto theorey is a good, viable option. If you get a baby, great! If not, you should take the child you are offered and live with it.
Under a no-abortion policy, you would force women to give birth to their rapist baby, and their own retarded, deformed siblings. See, most are opposed to all abortions. Is this you? If you cannot offer a better solution, then you really have no argument.
As for "family first" that has been less and less important. Frankly, womens rights was pursued so vehemently because they were sick and tired of being trapped at home, cooking, cleaning and all that jazz, while their husbands were boinking the secretary at lunch. No woman has to tolerate that. No one should. Men are no longer needed, and it burns them up. Men chose to disrupt the family with their numerous affairs, and forcing the woman to cook and clean and be a wife to a scum bag who doesnt deserve his nice family, and women as well were tired of being Just a mom. They are smarter than men, and are proven to be better problem solvers. Just a fact....Women are useful in the working world. They can use their assets to sell products, men tend to be calmer when dealing with an attractive, professional women. They are able to handle customers better, and management and time efficiency. What did you think would happen to the kids? Adults are selfish, greedy, money grubbing robots. Children have their pure views of right and wrong, while adults F*** up the rest of the world. I am for children first, adults last.
There is no real reason as to why adults will not adopt older kids, I suppose. As giving the real reason would mean showing their true selves. They really are selfish, uncaring, egotistical and non-compassionate.
I ask you one more thing//////what will happen when these angry, unadoptable kids grow up? What happens when the foster care system lets them out at 18? They will be un-compassionate, selfish, greedy and completely devoid of emotion. Just like "couples seeking to adopt" have made them feel. Unworthy, ugly, unwanted. Sounds like we are in for a rude awakening. I have always showed love to all born children . I have done the right thing, the rest of you....... have shown me once again, that a blob of cells, not yet considered a living thing outside the womb, is more important than the children already born, begging to be taken home with someone to love.

5010 · May 5, 2004, 03:11 pm

Quote:

Originally posted by prettyredhead,
WHy are there so many homeless kids already in the US>? Abortion eliminated unwanted kids, to avoid foster care. When you dont want the kid, and no ones adopting them, then what should we do>??

I think you raise a valid point that it is not good to support legislation against abortion without supporting the alternative. That is why I send money to both pro-life and adoption organizations. It makes no sense to me to support one without the other.

I think your assumption that pro-life groups are not pro-adoption is misguided.
If euthanasia of homeless kids somehow became legal, they would definitely oppose it because they already generally oppose assisted suicide. Also, organizations often have links to adoption of children with special needs.

prettyredhead · May 5, 2004, 03:25 pm

[ In some cases abortion is used as birth control. In many others, women know better but still have sex without any thought of the consequences. Why didn't she use birth conrtol or be sure her partner at least used a condom? To equate homeless kids with lack of abortion is ridiculous.
*** No, it is not far fetched. It is more like right on.

As far as I'm concerned, throw away children are a result of a dysfunctional woman and a society that caters to that dysfunction, much as you are doing by blaming any of this on the lack of abortions.

*** Your right on there. SOCIETY caters to adoptive couples, who only want a baby and no way, no how should they consider a already born kid. IF they could buy a perfect baby at Wal Mart they would. We should cater to the homeless kids. THere should be no such thing as a "throw away kid" when soooooo many are begging to buy a new baby. I say, too bad. I do not recommend that women put their baby up for adoption. I tell them to either abort, or keep their baby. They will regret the adoption all their lives. You can easily live with an abortion. It is like a death, you grieve and then move on..

There is a logical but unacceptable solution for most people to unwanted children and that is orphanages. Newt Gingrich suggested it back about 1995 and was thoroughly denounced for it. It surely would be a better alternative than living on the streets.
*** If I had any power, adoption guidelines would be overhauled, and homes for all these kids in foster care would be built for them to live in until they are 18. These homes would have schools, shops, everything a community has, but in one place, like a campus. This is the only reasonable solution you have spewed. Perhaps this would be better than foster care, and it would create jobs in some areas. Good plan, a good start at least, while they endlessly wait to be "picked" for adoption.

[/quote] They need more than scared and I doubt the pictures do much to scare them anyhow. The problem is the lack family values and the disrespect for marriage that has become part of our culture since the 60s. The feminists decided women are better than men and that women don't need men, except for sex and sometimes the resultant baby. So women now use men at their whim. Not all women but surely a goodly portion of them and many more as time goes by and this dreadful attitude is becoming prevasive in our society
.
***Yes, see above. I agree that alot of women lack maternal instincts altogether. Adoptive mothers should not have a career, it should be a negative when adopting. If they want to be parents, one needs to be home to actually parent. Society has nothing to do with the lack of parenting. Parents who abuse should be jailed and not let out. For a good, long time. Taking their kids is a favor to them, not a punishment. IF they remove the kids, then remove the parents from society. Punish the parents if you punish the kids by making them homeless. We have a value on children. But I see, that is fading as well. If that is the case, we should be bombed to oblivion and start over.

[/quote] Because most people who can't have babies of their own, want the experience of nurturing and raising a child from babyhood to adulthood. They want to enjoy all the stages of growth that goes with a child's progress. They want the memories of those sleepless nights and going through shots, the first tooth, the first day at kindergarten.... the whole thing.

***Too bad that they WANT a baby.I WANT a million dollars. Nature made it so that they could not, perhaps it HAD a better thing in mind, shame on them for not taking on a little challenge. Now they can rot waiting for the ever elusive baby. They want abortion illegal, so they can have the "pick of the litter" so to speak. It has nothing to do with their ethical point of view. It is PURE GREED. They WANT a baby, they DONT WANT to really parent. Three years old is not too much older than a baby. And to me, a 6 year old is still very much a baby.

I don't blame them for not printing it. But maybe they will. Lots of people talk about this all the time. You apparently aren't involved in this except for your particpation in abortion rights. Your whole premise seems aimed at proving abortion is the only solution to unwanted children.

*** It is isnt it? Your solution is to make people feel bad, who simply do not want their children. It is better NOT to be born, if you are not wanted. Right? Ever heard someone say that they wished they were never born? Mothers say this to their unwanted kids alot. It is sick , isnt it? Why make her have a baby she hates? It isnt your body. It never will be. DOnt assume all people give a damn about birth control, it is not fool-proof. Nothing is,, except abortion. And it has a pretty high rate of infertility. WHich should make you glad.....Family is no longer important. I think we should start fresh. Maybe the bombing needs to happen now.

]

Are you adopted or related to someone who is or to somemone who has adopted a child? How do you know so well that all these people who adopt are after pretending to do good or are showing off? There are people who adopt babies of mixed racial background or those with physical and mental problems. Yes even before they'll adopt a flawed older child. Maybe with the proper love and care, a flawed baby will grow into a great adult. Many of the older throwaways are going to have problems all their lives. It takes a very special person to get involved in that. Unfortunately in our society, there are not a lot of very special persons available.

*** I agree, you are one of them to be dictating my body, yet not offering a viable solution to the already born kids. WE OWE THEM something. They are citizens who deserve the best start, regardless of how they came about. They were here first, they should be placed first above unborn fetuses. Because we foster unfit adults, we all clean house from it.

Yes abortion would rid us of some unwanted children. But not as many as you think. Many women will go ahead and have the baby because of their religion or other reasons and never be good mothers. Not every woman is capable or willing to be a good mother. Then there are mothers who start off ok but due to many reasons, cannot cope with her child or children. Or maybe she is on drugs or is an alcoholic. Or becomes sick.
****Thus leaving their kids to foster hell. And then what? Should have had an abortion then.

I have not talked about the role of men and fathers in this. They can be instrumental in either making things better of worse but the decision to have a baby is totally the woman's. And since abortion is something only a woman can have, it's her responsibility to conduct herself so abortion is not a necessity.[/quote]
****This is a laughable paragraph. Men dont care as much as they care about her invading his wallet later on. They (most) would rather she have an abortion. That is the second thing they usually say when she says "Im pregnant" not, oh honey how wonderful. Most unmarried couples do not aspire to have a baby. Once they are born, they are here to stay. Prevention has not worked very well, has it/ To the tune of a million foster kids, and a million abortions yearly. Every year, more and more couples are losing their kids due to lack of money, loss of job, of benefits, ect. If she cannot afford her kids later in life, where do they end up? I agree that people should be respon. but it isnt working. It hasnt worked since B.C. People want the easy way out, it is our nature. We are a nation of convience.

VXerick · May 5, 2004, 03:43 pm

I have so far identified two women as posters to this forum (other than myself) .... Mia and prettyredhead. If these two are indicative of our current crop of females, I fear the future of the human race is doomed.

prettyredhead · May 5, 2004, 04:49 pm

I am happy to leave you speechless . LOL. Women are sweet in nature, for the most part. We were as repressed as slaves for many years, you cant hack it that women have evolved smarter than you.
I am a beautiful, loving, and graceful mother. I love kids, all kids, that are living here with me already. I have no time to dwell on what might have been....I am living in the now, and the kids that are already here, are far more important than those not yet able to live outside their hosts body. It really is a personal decision. It isnt for everyone, but we MUST offer a solution to those living, rather than those still to be born.

5010 · May 5, 2004, 06:02 pm

Quote:

Originally posted by prettyredhead,+--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (prettyredhead,)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>
In some cases abortion is used as birth control. In many others, women know better but still have sex without any thought of the consequences. Why didn't she use birth conrtol or be sure her partner at least used a condom? To equate homeless kids with lack of abortion is ridiculous.
*** No, it is not far fetched. It is more like right on.
[/b]

That didn't address her point.

Quote:

Originally posted by prettyredhead,+--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (prettyredhead,)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>
SOCIETY caters to adoptive couples, who only want a baby and no way, no how should they consider a already born kid.
[/b]

Not true. According to Adoption ABCs: "Generally, public adoption agencies handle mostly special needs adoptions. Adoptions services through public adoption agencies are usually available for a modest fee, but usually do not have newborns and offer older children, sibling groups and children with physical or psychological needs. The children often come from foster care with parents that have drug or alcohol related problems. It has been said that the disadvantages of public agencies could include the burden of paperwork, a bureaucratic approach and being bound by the court system."

Quote:

Originally posted by prettyredhead,

There should be no such thing as a "throw away kid" when soooooo many are begging to buy a new baby.

And yet despite the availability of abortion and adoption they exist.

Quote:

Originally posted by prettyredhead,

They will regret the adoption all their lives.

Regret what, that the person is alive or that they are with other parents? Do adopted people generally wish they had been aborted?

<!--QuoteBegin-prettyredhead,@

You can easily live with an abortion. It is like a death, you grieve and then move on.
[/quote]

Two can live with an adoption. Only one of them lives with an abortion.

And are you sure it is that easy?
<!--QuoteBegin-Excerpt from link

A major review of more than 200 scientific post-abortion studies, commissioned by the American Psychological Association and published in the journal Science in 1991, concluded that severe negative psychological reactions in women undergoing legal, first-trimester abortions are rare.

However, the survey noted that a small percentage of women do experience severe post-abortion distress that can overwhelm them. Such emotional pain, anti-abortion activists say, often is under-reported in post-abortion studies because it surfaces months or even years later.

"Most women go through a long latency period of denial," said David Reardon, founder of the Elliot Institute in Springfield, a national anti-abortion group that has conducted studies on post-abortion stress.

According to Reardon, statistics indicate that between 15 and 20 percent of women who undergo abortions develop post-abortion stress symptoms, though it can take as long as eight years for women to acknowledge and begin to deal with their feelings.
[/quote]

I can address other things later... no time now.

Comrade · May 5, 2004, 06:45 pm

Redhead does a lot of stereotyping, "all of these people have this situation"

Mr.Vicchio · May 5, 2004, 07:50 pm

Sorry Redhead, but your basic arguement is that aborted children would just be a drain on society, that they are unwanted, so why not kill them.

Hitler said the same thing about the unwanted elements of society. It resulted ina grizzly, graphic horrid holocaust. We have a holocaust of sorts now, its called 1.2 million babies dead because it was easier to kill them then for society to make people take responsibility for thier actions. 1.2 million humans, dead before they had a chance to grace this world. Thats the disgusting part.

GreatWyrm of Babylon · May 6, 2004, 02:49 am

#1 Failing to print your letter is not a violation of freedom of speech. Reminds me of the Dixie Chicks thinking that people not buying their record is a violation of their's. (prettyredhead)

#2 Hitler has no more to do with abortion that homeless children. (MrV)

#3 Precisely what does your physical appearence have to do with the topic? (prettyredhead)

Mr.Vicchio · May 6, 2004, 03:27 am

Yes it does. I am contrasting an historical figures views on unwanted peoples, with redheads. Both feel that unwanted people are a drain on society, and both have the smae solutions. Kill them.

GreatWyrm of Babylon · May 6, 2004, 03:36 am

MrV
Hitler rose to power because he knew how to play on people's fears. He did not give a damn about solving any problems other than how to make sure that nobody had power over Hitler. He correctly identified that a people that were paying a price for something they did not do would jump at the chance to make others pay that price instead. The tools he used to accomplish that goal were just tools. An axe used to bash in a skull is still just an axe. It is the action that is evil not the tool.

Mr.Vicchio · May 6, 2004, 03:41 am

What's more evil? To adovcate teh needless death of 1.2 million people a year because you don't believe they would be loved? Or to do as Hitler did to gain power?

Same means, different ends. Both deplorable.

GreatWyrm of Babylon · May 6, 2004, 03:51 am

This is what is called a "hasty generalization".

#1 Are you referring to birth control, abortion, killing the homeless, or killing Jews.
#2 Do you want the answer for the religous, or the non-religous?

Assuming you mean abortion, I will give both answers.

Religous:
If God meant those babies to survive we mortals could not have killed them.

UnReligous:
What right does the group have that the individual does not?

Mr.Vicchio · May 6, 2004, 05:43 am

I mean abortion.

I mena 1.2 million children dead before they are born.

I mean 1.2 million women feel that the children in thier wombs are unwanted, and the best way to deal with thier unwanted is death.

Hitler did the same thing for different reasons.

Same difference.

moondusk · May 6, 2004, 06:35 am

This is really a shame for mankind. Me being a mother has experienced how wonderful a child is. I personally do not favor abortions, but I agree that in some circumstances the society should allow abortion, if the mother so strongly does not want to have the child. Say for instance a woman is pregnant after being raped or a single woman who cannot afford to have a child in any means.

On the other hand adults should be more responsible to prevent unwanted pregnancies. If you have an unwanted pregnancy you should try to find solutions for any reasons to prevent an abortion.

From the social and political point of view education, media, religion etc. can uplift the moral view of people.

For believers A child is a gift from God. For non-believers A child is a natural gift. Anyway I believe a child is a bud of joy for life.

May 5, 2004, 12:50 pm	#2 (permalink) (top)
Mr.Vicchio Navy Veteran Location: Texas Posts: 6,031	So what you are saying is that because these children are unwanted, why not end the begging of the unwanted's little lives by just getting rid of them. Another person used to feel the same way, Hitler would be proud his ideals live on in his enemies home land. Einstein's "Theory of Relativity" is still being challenged to this day, but by consensus Global Warming is a fact... that's REAL science at work, why didn't Albert just go that route?

May 5, 2004, 06:45 pm	#12 (permalink) (top)
Comrade Hot Lava Location: Texas Posts: 1,229	Redhead does a lot of stereotyping, "all of these people have this situation" Oh, it's really too bad, isn't it? -- http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/050121/480/watw10701210224 Hahaha, that's funny. Liberals are so silly!

May 5, 2004, 07:50 pm	#13 (permalink) (top)
Mr.Vicchio Navy Veteran Location: Texas Posts: 6,031	Sorry Redhead, but your basic arguement is that aborted children would just be a drain on society, that they are unwanted, so why not kill them. Hitler said the same thing about the unwanted elements of society. It resulted ina grizzly, graphic horrid holocaust. We have a holocaust of sorts now, its called 1.2 million babies dead because it was easier to kill them then for society to make people take responsibility for thier actions. 1.2 million humans, dead before they had a chance to grace this world. Thats the disgusting part. Einstein's "Theory of Relativity" is still being challenged to this day, but by consensus Global Warming is a fact... that's REAL science at work, why didn't Albert just go that route?

May 6, 2004, 03:27 am	#15 (permalink) (top)
Mr.Vicchio Navy Veteran Location: Texas Posts: 6,031	Yes it does. I am contrasting an historical figures views on unwanted peoples, with redheads. Both feel that unwanted people are a drain on society, and both have the smae solutions. Kill them. Einstein's "Theory of Relativity" is still being challenged to this day, but by consensus Global Warming is a fact... that's REAL science at work, why didn't Albert just go that route?

May 6, 2004, 03:41 am	#17 (permalink) (top)
Mr.Vicchio Navy Veteran Location: Texas Posts: 6,031	What's more evil? To adovcate teh needless death of 1.2 million people a year because you don't believe they would be loved? Or to do as Hitler did to gain power? Same means, different ends. Both deplorable. Einstein's "Theory of Relativity" is still being challenged to this day, but by consensus Global Warming is a fact... that's REAL science at work, why didn't Albert just go that route?

May 5, 2004, 12:14 pm	#1 (permalink) (top)
prettyredhead Igneous Magma Posts: 336	WHy are there so many homeless kids already in the US>? Abortion eliminated unwanted kids, to avoid foster care. When you dont want the kid, and no ones adopting them, then what should we do>?? Should we have Brazil's embarassment of street children.....is that what the US wants? Street children. I have pasted a letter I wrote to a local newspaper. They didnt print it, of course, and denied my freedom of speech, but here it is..... Dear Editor: I must reply in regard to the abortion opponents outside the local high school, showing extra large pictures of dead fetuses. I am so furious, that I dont know where to begin. First of all, it was highly innapropriate to take it upon yourself to resort to cheap and tacky scare tactics to scare teen girls. Once the pants are down, the pictures will be forgotten, for one thing, and secondly, it is a very personal decision, to be discussed with a womans doctor. All your message sends is that under no circumstances, should you discuss your pregnancy with anyone, for fear of the anti-abortion fanatics getting wind of it. You should just keep it in, and find a doctor on the sly. And, finally, I ask this....what do you have to offer the kids who are already born, who are in need of homes this very minute. Is a child over 5 too old to love? If so, you are of questionable character. We know that MOST couples seeking to adopt only want a baby. Any other child will simply not do. A child any older than 3 is too damaged, and a throw away. Is that a fact? Why are there more kids in need of homes, than there are homes? Why are the older, already born kids LESS important than an embryo. What do you have to offer this child, that is unwanted, once it is born>? Will you adopt it, or will it go to the highest bidder? Especially if it is blue eyed, blonde haired? Someone explain to me when we started to place monetary value upon children? Why is it that a newborn can find a home, yet a 5 or 17 year old cannot? Abortion is legal, in no small part, due to the fact that there are half a million already born kids, who need homes first. Someone please explain to me why this is......then, when you offer a valid alternative for these kids already here, then I will listen to your opposition to abortion. Christine () () IL Of course, they will not print this. WHy is it that NO ONE EVER TALKS about this? The travesty that is called foster care and adoptive couples. I say, you get NO CHOICE in age. You are matched to 3 children, some may be babies, maybe not, sort of a lotto. Do you want to be a parent or not? I say, you can deny your matches, 3 times, after that, you will go to the bottom of the adoption list. That seems fair to me and a million foster kids, and older kids. Elaborate. How can one be so opposed to abortion rights, when they have NOTHING to offer older kids waiting for homes? No one wants to adress it, it is a hidden bais. Lets bring it upfront to talk about. I think I know why, they see these kids as flawwed and damaged goods. That is why. See, they dont CARE about having a kid, they care about a baby to show off and pretend to their friends that they are "doing good". that is the meat of it. They wont admit this fact, however. If you see these kids as throw aways, like many others, then you dont deserve a child of your own. You cannot love an adopted child, unless it is a baby. This is sick. Completely sick.

May 5, 2004, 01:04 pm	#3 (permalink) (top)
prettyredhead Igneous Magma Posts: 336	Hitler has nothing to do with why older kids are less favored than blobs of cells called fetuses. So, what is your answer MR. Know it all? Ususally your right on top of this.

May 5, 2004, 02:45 pm	#6 (permalink) (top)
prettyredhead Igneous Magma Posts: 336	I have fostered many kids, all ages and races. So, I do not adopt one because I am already raising three alone. I am only one person. If every adoptive family in America, would adopt one child, there would be no need for orphanages. But, since most would rather be child less, than adopt a older child, then........they can go take a long walk off a short pier for all I care. I have doubts that those who only want babies, are truly sincere. Too bad if they WANT a baby. My lotto theorey is a good, viable option. If you get a baby, great! If not, you should take the child you are offered and live with it. Under a no-abortion policy, you would force women to give birth to their rapist baby, and their own retarded, deformed siblings. See, most are opposed to all abortions. Is this you? If you cannot offer a better solution, then you really have no argument. As for "family first" that has been less and less important. Frankly, womens rights was pursued so vehemently because they were sick and tired of being trapped at home, cooking, cleaning and all that jazz, while their husbands were boinking the secretary at lunch. No woman has to tolerate that. No one should. Men are no longer needed, and it burns them up. Men chose to disrupt the family with their numerous affairs, and forcing the woman to cook and clean and be a wife to a scum bag who doesnt deserve his nice family, and women as well were tired of being Just a mom. They are smarter than men, and are proven to be better problem solvers. Just a fact....Women are useful in the working world. They can use their assets to sell products, men tend to be calmer when dealing with an attractive, professional women. They are able to handle customers better, and management and time efficiency. What did you think would happen to the kids? Adults are selfish, greedy, money grubbing robots. Children have their pure views of right and wrong, while adults F*** up the rest of the world. I am for children first, adults last. There is no real reason as to why adults will not adopt older kids, I suppose. As giving the real reason would mean showing their true selves. They really are selfish, uncaring, egotistical and non-compassionate. I ask you one more thing//////what will happen when these angry, unadoptable kids grow up? What happens when the foster care system lets them out at 18? They will be un-compassionate, selfish, greedy and completely devoid of emotion. Just like "couples seeking to adopt" have made them feel. Unworthy, ugly, unwanted. Sounds like we are in for a rude awakening. I have always showed love to all born children . I have done the right thing, the rest of you....... have shown me once again, that a blob of cells, not yet considered a living thing outside the womb, is more important than the children already born, begging to be taken home with someone to love.

May 5, 2004, 03:25 pm	#8 (permalink) (top)
prettyredhead Igneous Magma Posts: 336	[ In some cases abortion is used as birth control. In many others, women know better but still have sex without any thought of the consequences. Why didn't she use birth conrtol or be sure her partner at least used a condom? To equate homeless kids with lack of abortion is ridiculous. * No, it is not far fetched. It is more like right on. As far as I'm concerned, throw away children are a result of a dysfunctional woman and a society that caters to that dysfunction, much as you are doing by blaming any of this on the lack of abortions. * Your right on there. SOCIETY caters to adoptive couples, who only want a baby and no way, no how should they consider a already born kid. IF they could buy a perfect baby at Wal Mart they would. We should cater to the homeless kids. THere should be no such thing as a "throw away kid" when soooooo many are begging to buy a new baby. I say, too bad. I do not recommend that women put their baby up for adoption. I tell them to either abort, or keep their baby. They will regret the adoption all their lives. You can easily live with an abortion. It is like a death, you grieve and then move on.. There is a logical but unacceptable solution for most people to unwanted children and that is orphanages. Newt Gingrich suggested it back about 1995 and was thoroughly denounced for it. It surely would be a better alternative than living on the streets. * If I had any power, adoption guidelines would be overhauled, and homes for all these kids in foster care would be built for them to live in until they are 18. These homes would have schools, shops, everything a community has, but in one place, like a campus. This is the only reasonable solution you have spewed. Perhaps this would be better than foster care, and it would create jobs in some areas. Good plan, a good start at least, while they endlessly wait to be "picked" for adoption. [/quote] They need more than scared and I doubt the pictures do much to scare them anyhow. The problem is the lack family values and the disrespect for marriage that has become part of our culture since the 60s. The feminists decided women are better than men and that women don't need men, except for sex and sometimes the resultant baby. So women now use men at their whim. Not all women but surely a goodly portion of them and many more as time goes by and this dreadful attitude is becoming prevasive in our society . Yes, see above. I agree that alot of women lack maternal instincts altogether. Adoptive mothers should not have a career, it should be a negative when adopting. If they want to be parents, one needs to be home to actually parent. Society has nothing to do with the lack of parenting. Parents who abuse should be jailed and not let out. For a good, long time. Taking their kids is a favor to them, not a punishment. IF they remove the kids, then remove the parents from society. Punish the parents if you punish the kids by making them homeless. We have a value on children. But I see, that is fading as well. If that is the case, we should be bombed to oblivion and start over. [/quote] Because most people who can't have babies of their own, want the experience of nurturing and raising a child from babyhood to adulthood. They want to enjoy all the stages of growth that goes with a child's progress. They want the memories of those sleepless nights and going through shots, the first tooth, the first day at kindergarten.... the whole thing. Too bad that they WANT a baby.I WANT a million dollars. Nature made it so that they could not, perhaps it HAD a better thing in mind, shame on them for not taking on a little challenge. Now they can rot waiting for the ever elusive baby. They want abortion illegal, so they can have the "pick of the litter" so to speak. It has nothing to do with their ethical point of view. It is PURE GREED. They WANT a baby, they DONT WANT to really parent. Three years old is not too much older than a baby. And to me, a 6 year old is still very much a baby. I don't blame them for not printing it. But maybe they will. Lots of people talk about this all the time. You apparently aren't involved in this except for your particpation in abortion rights. Your whole premise seems aimed at proving abortion is the only solution to unwanted children. * It is isnt it? Your solution is to make people feel bad, who simply do not want their children. It is better NOT to be born, if you are not wanted. Right? Ever heard someone say that they wished they were never born? Mothers say this to their unwanted kids alot. It is sick , isnt it? Why make her have a baby she hates? It isnt your body. It never will be. DOnt assume all people give a damn about birth control, it is not fool-proof. Nothing is,, except abortion. And it has a pretty high rate of infertility. WHich should make you glad.....Family is no longer important. I think we should start fresh. Maybe the bombing needs to happen now. ] Are you adopted or related to someone who is or to somemone who has adopted a child? How do you know so well that all these people who adopt are after pretending to do good or are showing off? There are people who adopt babies of mixed racial background or those with physical and mental problems. Yes even before they'll adopt a flawed older child. Maybe with the proper love and care, a flawed baby will grow into a great adult. Many of the older throwaways are going to have problems all their lives. It takes a very special person to get involved in that. Unfortunately in our society, there are not a lot of very special persons available. * I agree, you are one of them to be dictating my body, yet not offering a viable solution to the already born kids. WE OWE THEM something. They are citizens who deserve the best start, regardless of how they came about. They were here first, they should be placed first above unborn fetuses. Because we foster unfit adults, we all clean house from it. Yes abortion would rid us of some unwanted children. But not as many as you think. Many women will go ahead and have the baby because of their religion or other reasons and never be good mothers. Not every woman is capable or willing to be a good mother. Then there are mothers who start off ok but due to many reasons, cannot cope with her child or children. Or maybe she is on drugs or is an alcoholic. Or becomes sick. Thus leaving their kids to foster hell. And then what? Should have had an abortion then. I have not talked about the role of men and fathers in this. They can be instrumental in either making things better of worse but the decision to have a baby is totally the woman's. And since abortion is something only a woman can have, it's her responsibility to conduct herself so abortion is not a necessity.[/quote] **This is a laughable paragraph. Men dont care as much as they care about her invading his wallet later on. They (most) would rather she have an abortion. That is the second thing they usually say when she says "Im pregnant" not, oh honey how wonderful. Most unmarried couples do not aspire to have a baby. Once they are born, they are here to stay. Prevention has not worked very well, has it/ To the tune of a million foster kids, and a million abortions yearly. Every year, more and more couples are losing their kids due to lack of money, loss of job, of benefits, ect. If she cannot afford her kids later in life, where do they end up? I agree that people should be respon. but it isnt working. It hasnt worked since B.C. People want the easy way out, it is our nature. We are a nation of convience.

May 5, 2004, 03:43 pm	#9 (permalink) (top)
VXerick Igneous Magma Location: PA Posts: 328	I have so far identified two women as posters to this forum (other than myself) .... Mia and prettyredhead. If these two are indicative of our current crop of females, I fear the future of the human race is doomed.

May 5, 2004, 04:49 pm	#10 (permalink) (top)
prettyredhead Igneous Magma Posts: 336	I am happy to leave you speechless . LOL. Women are sweet in nature, for the most part. We were as repressed as slaves for many years, you cant hack it that women have evolved smarter than you. I am a beautiful, loving, and graceful mother. I love kids, all kids, that are living here with me already. I have no time to dwell on what might have been....I am living in the now, and the kids that are already here, are far more important than those not yet able to live outside their hosts body. It really is a personal decision. It isnt for everyone, but we MUST offer a solution to those living, rather than those still to be born.

May 6, 2004, 02:49 am	#14 (permalink) (top)
GreatWyrm of Babylon Avatar of Tiamut Location: Dallas, Texas (Irving) Posts: 848	#1 Failing to print your letter is not a violation of freedom of speech. Reminds me of the Dixie Chicks thinking that people not buying their record is a violation of their's. (prettyredhead) #2 Hitler has no more to do with abortion that homeless children. (MrV) #3 Precisely what does your physical appearence have to do with the topic? (prettyredhead)

May 6, 2004, 03:36 am	#16 (permalink) (top)
GreatWyrm of Babylon Avatar of Tiamut Location: Dallas, Texas (Irving) Posts: 848	MrV Hitler rose to power because he knew how to play on people's fears. He did not give a damn about solving any problems other than how to make sure that nobody had power over Hitler. He correctly identified that a people that were paying a price for something they did not do would jump at the chance to make others pay that price instead. The tools he used to accomplish that goal were just tools. An axe used to bash in a skull is still just an axe. It is the action that is evil not the tool.

May 6, 2004, 03:51 am	#18 (permalink) (top)
GreatWyrm of Babylon Avatar of Tiamut Location: Dallas, Texas (Irving) Posts: 848	This is what is called a "hasty generalization". #1 Are you referring to birth control, abortion, killing the homeless, or killing Jews. #2 Do you want the answer for the religous, or the non-religous? Assuming you mean abortion, I will give both answers. Religous: If God meant those babies to survive we mortals could not have killed them. UnReligous: What right does the group have that the individual does not?

May 6, 2004, 05:43 am	#19 (permalink) (top)
Mr.Vicchio Navy Veteran Location: Texas Posts: 6,031	I mean abortion. I mena 1.2 million children dead before they are born. I mean 1.2 million women feel that the children in thier wombs are unwanted, and the best way to deal with thier unwanted is death. Hitler did the same thing for different reasons. Same difference. Einstein's "Theory of Relativity" is still being challenged to this day, but by consensus Global Warming is a fact... that's REAL science at work, why didn't Albert just go that route?

May 6, 2004, 06:35 am	#20 (permalink) (top)
moondusk Molten Ash Posts: 40	This is really a shame for mankind. Me being a mother has experienced how wonderful a child is. I personally do not favor abortions, but I agree that in some circumstances the society should allow abortion, if the mother so strongly does not want to have the child. Say for instance a woman is pregnant after being raped or a single woman who cannot afford to have a child in any means. On the other hand adults should be more responsible to prevent unwanted pregnancies. If you have an unwanted pregnancy you should try to find solutions for any reasons to prevent an abortion. From the social and political point of view education, media, religion etc. can uplift the moral view of people. For believers A child is a gift from God. For non-believers A child is a natural gift. Anyway I believe a child is a bud of joy for life. www.moondusk.com