Abortion to prevent increased suffering

[Chriliman]

Let’s only consider the abortions where the early zygote, that isn’t conscious and can’t feel anything, isn’t wanted for whatever reason. Assuming they’ll go to heaven in some capacity, why would it be better to take them full term just to be put into foster care and possibly suffer mental/physical abuse that will effect them for an entire lifetime? Will their reward in heaven be greater if they endure a lifetime of suffering? Is that the only justification for taking it full term to birth?

 

[St_Worm2]

Hello @Chriliman, the last time I checked, there were 100+ "qualified" couples looking to adopt a newborn baby for every newborn baby who is put up for adoption (in America anyway). So, foster care and the suffering of mental/physical abuse should be of little to no concern to birth moms who are unable to keep and care for their babies.

And the adoption option will stop the suffering that birth moms feel over killing their babies via abortion.

--David

"A baby is cradled / carried in the womb of it's mother, to grow and be nurtured until birth. Each baby is a wholly separate person from it's mother: With different DNA, different fingerprints, with possibly a different blood type or the opposite sex. The baby is a person living within a person and not "the mother's body". The mom is appointed to care for the separate life she carries within her and once it's born, find a home for her baby, if she can't provide one." -- Melody Green
.​

 

[Chriliman]

Hello @Chriliman, the last time I checked, there were 100+ "qualified" couples looking to adopt a newborn baby for every newborn baby who is put up for adoption (in America anyway). So, foster care and the suffering of mental/physical abuse should be of little to no concern to birth moms who are unable to keep and care for their babies.

And the adoption option will stop the suffering that birth moms feel over killing their babies via abortion.

--David

"A baby is cradled / carried in the womb of it's mother, to grow and be nurtured until birth. Each baby is a wholly separate person from it's mother: With different DNA, different fingerprints, with possibly a different blood type or the opposite sex. The baby is a person living within a person and not "the mother's body". The mom is appointed to care for the separate life she carries within her and once it's born, find a home for her baby, if she can't provide one." -- Melody Green
.​

I get that, but as stated above, I’m talking about the unwanted ones. There’s over 400,000 foster kids without families right now that could suffer from anything on this list:

1. The average age of a foster youth is 8 and a half years old.¹
2. A foster youth typically spends just under two years – 20 months – in foster care.
3. Over 25,600 foster youth spend more than five years in foster care.
4. More than 1,200 youth are placed in foster care nationwide because of their own alcohol dependence problems.
5. Over half of all foster youth are reunited with their family or primary caregiver when they exit the system.
6. 6 percent of all children in the U.S. will find themselves in the foster care system before they turn 18.²
7. Foster youth are seven times more likely than non-foster youth to have Depression, and five times more likely to have Anxiety.
8. There were 10 percent more youth in foster care nationwide in 2016 than there were in 2012.³
9. One out of every five people who age out of the foster care system lack a home when they turn 18.4
10. By the time foster youth are 24, only half of them will have stable and steady employment. The same percentage develop substance abuse.
11. Among former foster youth, one-third of all males and three-fourths of all females rely on government assistance programs.
12. In comparison to veterans, former foster youth are twice as likely to suffer from Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder.5
13. Close to 56,000 children are foster youth in California.6
14. Just under four out of every 10 – 38 percent, to be precise – foster youth in California will never find a permanent housing placement.
15. Close to 19,000 former California foster youth are presently enrolled in MediCal.
16. One out of every two foster youth has dealt with four or more Adverse Childhood Experiences.
17. Eight out of every 10 foster youth enter the system with notable mental health needs.
18. Just over half – 51 percent – of all foster youth graduate high school.
19. Just one out of every five foster youth is at grade level in English and language arts in third grade, and only 9 percent are at grade level in math in eighth grade.
20. Less than one in four foster youth enroll in college.
21. By age 26, just 4 percent of former foster youth had successfully obtained a bachelor’s degree.7
22. 54 percent of all former foster youth who are adopted have parents over the age of 50, and 16 percent have parents that are 60 or older.8
23. 70 percent of children adopted out of foster care have married adoptive parents, and 55 percent of them did not know their adoptive parents beforehand.
24. Among former foster youth who are later adopted, 37 percent are white, 35 percent are black and 16 percent are Hispanic. Among these adoptive parents, 63 percent are white, 27 percent are black and 5 percent are Hispanic.
25. As for their reasons for adopting foster youth, 86 percent did so to provide a permanent home for a child, 39 percent did so because of infertility and 24 percent did so because they wanted their child to have a sibling.
26. 60 percent of parents adopted a foster child instead of an infant because it was cheaper.
27. 95 percent of parents who adopt foster youth said they would make the same decision again.
28. Around 184,000 households in the U.S. have a foster youth in them.9
29. Compared to their peers, male former foster youth are four times as likely to commit a crime. Females are 10 times more likely.

Why is it better to put them through all the negative things on this list, rather than send them to heaven early? Better reward?

Also just realized they risk going to hell if taken to mid-term/birth. Hmm…

29 Surprising Foster Care Facts – Alternative Family Services
https://www.ccainstitute.org/resources/fact-sheets
Fact Sheets
https://www.ccainstitute.org/resources/fact-sheets

 

[Jake Arsenal]

Let’s only consider the abortions where the early zygote, that isn’t conscious and can’t feel anything, isn’t wanted for whatever reason. Assuming they’ll go to heaven in some capacity, why would it be better to take them full term just to be put into foster care and possibly suffer mental/physical abuse that will effect them for an entire lifetime? Will their reward in heaven be greater if they endure a lifetime of suffering? Is that the only justification for taking it full term to birth?

In response to your entire post: Proverbs 17:15

In response to some of the questions you have raised: Romans 8:17, Romans 8:36, Romans 12:9, Philippians 3:10


My final response to the whole issue: Psalm 94:21

God's clearly stated response: 2 Kings 24:4, Exodus 20:13, Exodus 21:22-25, Deuteronomy 19:13, Deuteronomy 27:25, Deuteronomy 19:10, Numbers 35:33 You shall not pollute the land in which you live, for blood pollutes the land, and no atonement can be made for the land for the blood that is shed in it, except by the blood of the one who shed it.

 

[QvQ]

My mother told to beware the person who claims "I did it for your own good."

 

[Chriliman]

In response to your entire post: Proverbs 17:15

In response to some of the questions you have raised: Romans 8:17, Romans 8:36, Romans 12:9, Philippians 3:10


My final response to the whole issue: Psalm 94:21

God's clearly stated response: 2 Kings 24:4, Exodus 20:13, Exodus 21:22-25, Deuteronomy 19:13, Deuteronomy 27:25, Deuteronomy 19:10, Numbers 35:33 You shall not pollute the land in which you live, for blood pollutes the land, and no atonement can be made for the land for the blood that is shed in it, except by the blood of the one who shed it.

If you use those verses to condemn early abortions, which don’t even mention abortion specifically, then why don’t you use these to
Condone slave abuse:
Exodus 21:20-21

Condemn anyone born of illicit union:
Deuteronomy 23:2

Cutting the hands off women who defend their husbands by grabbing the aggressors genitals:
Deuteronomy 25:11-12

forcing rape victims to marry their rapist
Deuteronomy 22:28-29

killing people who disobey priests:
Deuteronomy 17:12

killing adulters
Leviticus 20:10

there’s more, but I got tired. So why use your verses to vaguely justify your position, but ignore these that clearly and blatantly say what to do?

 

[QvQ]

Man is born to trouble.
By predicting the fortunes of a set of men who, because of circumstances of birth, are in your estimation, born more inclined to trouble, we should take arms against their sea of troubles and end those troubles, most conveniently, simply by ending that set of men?
We could expand this entire concept to "for their own good" send whole troops of suffering folks off to heaven and pat ourselves on our back for doing so.
However destroying another person's body "for their own good" or to spare them the trouble they are born to, is, for some people, not a particular virtue.

 

[St_Worm2]

I get that, but as stated above, I’m talking about the unwanted ones.

Hello again Chriliman, my main point in my last post was that there are NO "unwanted ones" when we are talking about newborn babies and adoption (rather than abortion). If our birth moms choose life (instead of choosing to kill their babies in the womb) there are a plethora of already "qualified" parents out there just waiting/hoping to adopt them (FAR more qualified parents waiting to adopt than we have babies for them to adopt, in point of fact ).

Fostering of unwanted "older" kids is an undoubted problem for us as a society (we need more people who are willing to adopt older children), but this has nothing to do with this thread's principal argument, that abortion would prevent the suffering that is sometimes associated with foster care, because abortion doesn't prevent the need for older kids to be fostered (although adoption would, of course ).

Adoption is the better option

--David

"A baby is cradled / carried in the womb of it's mother, to grow and be nurtured until birth. Each baby is a wholly separate person from it's mother: With different DNA, different fingerprints, with possibly a different blood type or the opposite sex. The baby is a person living within a person and not "the mother's body". The mom is appointed to care for the separate life she carries within her and once it's born, find a home for her baby, if she can't provide one." -- Melody Green
.​

 

[disciple Clint]

Let’s only consider the abortions where the early zygote, that isn’t conscious and can’t feel anything, isn’t wanted for whatever reason. Assuming they’ll go to heaven in some capacity, why would it be better to take them full term just to be put into foster care and possibly suffer mental/physical abuse that will effect them for an entire lifetime? Will their reward in heaven be greater if they endure a lifetime of suffering? Is that the only justification for taking it full term to birth?

Wow how interesting by that standard shouldn't all Christians just be terminated as soon as they become Christians?

 

[Larniavc]

Wow how interesting by that standard shouldn't all Christians just be terminated as soon as they become Christians?

That would seem the best way to avoid future sin. It’s like when Christians cry at funerals: isn’t the dead person in glory ever after? Why the tears?

 

[disciple Clint]

That would seem the best way to avoid future sin. It’s like when Christians cry at funerals: isn’t the dead person in glory ever after? Why the tears?

I can answer that question. The fact that you know someone is in heaven and no longer suffering does not preclude your personal feeling of loss or the acute sadness and despair you feel each and every time you are reminded that you will no longer share life with the person that you love so deeply.

 

[Larniavc]

I can answer that question. The fact that you know someone is in heaven and no longer suffering does not preclude your personal feeling of loss or the acute sadness and despair you feel each and every time you are reminded that you will no longer share life with the person that you love so deeply.

But if this life is a drop in the ocean compared to heaven why does it bother the Christian when they will have eternity with their loved ones? Why the despair when in the (relative) blink of an eye you will be reunited for ever?

I’m often told that from an atheist point of view life is pointless but from a Christian point of view this Earthly life seems pointless when the vast majority of one’s eternal existence is in heaven?

 

[Kylie]

Hello @Chriliman, the last time I checked, there were 100+ "qualified" couples looking to adopt a newborn baby for every newborn baby who is put up for adoption (in America anyway). So, foster care and the suffering of mental/physical abuse should be of little to no concern to birth moms who are unable to keep and care for their babies.

And the adoption option will stop the suffering that birth moms feel over killing their babies via abortion.

--David

"A baby is cradled / carried in the womb of it's mother, to grow and be nurtured until birth. Each baby is a wholly separate person from it's mother: With different DNA, different fingerprints, with possibly a different blood type or the opposite sex. The baby is a person living within a person and not "the mother's body". The mom is appointed to care for the separate life she carries within her and once it's born, find a home for her baby, if she can't provide one." -- Melody Green
.​

The fact that there are nearly 424,000 children in the foster system waiting for foster parents suggests you are wrong.

 

[Chriliman]

Hello again Chriliman, my main point in my last post was that there are NO "unwanted ones" when we are talking about newborn babies and adoption (rather than abortion). If our birth moms choose life (instead of choosing to kill their babies in the womb) there are a plethora of already "qualified" parents out there just waiting/hoping to adopt them (FAR more qualified parents waiting to adopt than we have babies for them to adopt, in point of fact ).

Fostering of unwanted "older" kids is an undoubted problem for us as a society (we need more people who are willing to adopt older children), but this has nothing to do with this thread's principal argument, that abortion would prevent the suffering that is sometimes associated with foster care, because abortion doesn't prevent the need for older kids to be fostered (although adoption would, of course ).

Adoption is the better option

--David

"A baby is cradled / carried in the womb of it's mother, to grow and be nurtured until birth. Each baby is a wholly separate person from it's mother: With different DNA, different fingerprints, with possibly a different blood type or the opposite sex. The baby is a person living within a person and not "the mother's body". The mom is appointed to care for the separate life she carries within her and once it's born, find a home for her baby, if she can't provide one." -- Melody Green
.​

I mostly agree, where I disagree is the idea that abortion doesn’t prevent older kids from being stuck in foster care, but actually, if no abortions occurred over the last many years, then we’d have thousands more older unwanted kids in foster care.

How does this not show that early abortion is a viable solution, of many possible solutions(regular birth control for example), to prevent unwanted children of any age?

 

[Chriliman]

Man is born to trouble.
By predicting the fortunes of a set of men who, because of circumstances of birth, are in your estimation, born more inclined to trouble, we should take arms against their sea of troubles and end those troubles, most conveniently, simply by ending that set of men?
We could expand this entire concept to "for their own good" send whole troops of suffering folks off to heaven and pat ourselves on our back for doing so.
However destroying another person's body "for their own good" or to spare them the trouble they are born to, is, for some people, not a particular virtue.

There are verses that say it’s better to have not been born than witness or cause evil in this world.

Ecclesiastes 4:3
But better than both is he who has not yet been and has not seen the evil deeds that are done under the sun.

Job 3:16-19
16 Or why was I not as a hidden stillborn child,
as infants who never see the light?
17 There the wicked cease from troubling,
and there the weary are at rest.
18 There the prisoners are at ease together;
they hear not the voice of the taskmaster.
19 The small and the great are there,
and the slave is free from his master.

Matthew 26:24
“The Son of Man will go just as it is written about him. But woe to that man who betrays the Son of Man! It would be better for him if he had not been born.”

Im not saying early abortion should be a first solution, more like last if all other prevention fails, but clearly the Bible doesn’t seem to mind if we prevent birth to some extent.

 

[o_mlly]

29. Compared to their peers, male former foster youth are four times as likely to commit a crime. Females are 10 times more likely.

30. 100% of foster care children prefer that you not kill them.
31. 100% of people who favor abortion are already born.

 

[QvQ]

There are verses that say it’s better to have not been born than witness or cause evil in this world.

Man is born to trouble...
And there is John 10:10 "The thief comes only to steal and kill and destroy; I have come that they may have life, and have it to the full."
If, as you say, it is about sparing the child suffering, then to be logically consistent, it would be act of love and kindness to kill all the homeless, the crippled and the poor.

 

[Chriliman]

Man is born to trouble...
And there is John 10:10 "The thief comes only to steal and kill and destroy; I have come that they may have life, and have it to the full."
If, as you say, it is about sparing the child suffering, then to be logically consistent, it would be act of love and kindness to kill all the homeless, the crippled and the poor.

No doubt it’s more loving to give birth and raise the child, but most who want abortions aren’t capable, or just don’t want to give that love, thus why they give them to foster care and why we have over 400,000 kids in foster care. Regardless what you think, that fact will always be there to remind you that we need a better solution, unless you’re fine with that number rising? Can’t force people to take kids in, better to let people make and learn from their own choices.

 

[QvQ]

We, as a society, need those children. Since Roe, we are missing artists, musicians, scientists, all forms of labor and creativity. Roe flushed a lot of talent down the drain.
Alexander Hamilton was an orphan. What would the world be if Einstein's mother had "chosen" to end his life?
Let all the children see the light of day and seek their fortune, whatever joy or suffering that providence may entail.

 

[Chriliman]

We, as a society, need those children. Since Roe, we are missing artists, musicians, scientists, all forms of labor and creativity. Roe flushed a lot of talent down the drain.
Alexander Hamilton was an orphan. What would the world be if Einstein's mother had "chosen" to end his life?
Let all the children see the light of day and seek their fortune, whatever joy or suffering that providence may entail.

By that logic, we shouldn’t prevent children at all at the risk of missing out on all the rare gifts to the human race. Are you willing to accept that inevitable implication of your argument?

Or, how bout we let those who wants kids, have them and those who don’t, prevent them in ways that make sense.