Companies should support adoption not abortion

[Valletta]

Companies should support adoption, not abortion | Opinion

 

[GreatLakes4Ever]

Companies should support adoption, not abortion | Opinion

Company I work for is liberal (doesn’t have funding for traveling for abortions because it isn’t needed in Illinois but knowing them I think they would if it was needed due to state politics) and they do support adoption. They’ll reimburse me something like up to $5,000 in expenses if I adopt a child. This doesn’t have to be an either or type thing. Companies can support both. And in a free market economy, it should be celebrated that companies can make these decisions.

 

[Belk]

Companies should support adoption, not abortion | Opinion

Peter Rex's opinion is noted.

 

[RDKirk]

Companies are generally going to support whatever increases their profits.

Before the Civil Rights Act, many companies eschewed marketing to black people (for instance, putting black people in their advertising) because they didn't want their white market to get the impression they were a company "for" blacks. They always could...but they didn't.

The Civil Rights Act gave them "cover," so-to-speak, to market to blacks, and suddenly black people appeared in their advertising. McDonald's went so hard after the black market that it almost started to look like it was a company "for" blacks.

Companies are generally going to support whatever increases their profits.

 

[renniks]

Good article.

 

[Fantine]

Paying employees $7500 to give their babies up for adoption sounds like a bribe to me.
Are they giving mothers who keep their babies $7500?
If they want to give mothers $7500 they should do it for every mother--married, single, happy, unhappy...
On the other hand, families who want to adopt usually get little help, and there are many hard-to-place children in foster care.
If you as a consumer don't like a company's policies you can always boycott them.

 

[DaisyDay]

They can do both. If they really want a happy and productive workforce then they can have paid maternity/paternity, help with childcare, generous leave and a livable wage. The US is not family-friendly.

The article was ... not accurate. It compared women who had abortions with women who were never pregnant, but neglected to mention women who gave birth. Postpartum depression and postpartum psychosis are well-documented risks of giving birth.

 

[loveofourlord]

Companies should support adoption, not abortion | Opinion

How about before you start demanding more babies be put up for adoption have the catholic church and other agencies remove rejecting atheists/muslsims/protestants/LGBTQ from adopting. Can't on one hand say adoption is a option then reject anyone you don't like from adopting. You want to increase amount of unwanted children, but reject adopting them.

 

[loveofourlord]

They can do both. If they really want a happy and productive workforce then they can have paid maternity/paternity, help with childcare, generous leave and a livable wage. The US is not family-friendly.

The article was ... not accurate. It compared women who had abortions with women who were never pregnant, but neglected to mention women who gave birth. Postpartum depression and postpartum psychosis are well-documented risks of giving birth.

yeah, most of the statistics about how bad abortion is are generally lies as they leave out that pregnancy is far more dangerous. My favorite is that death during pregnancies is 18X's more likely then during abortion.

 

[RDKirk]

Paying employees $7500 to give their babies up for adoption sounds like a bribe to me.
Are they giving mothers who keep their babies $7500?
If they want to give mothers $7500 they should do it for every mother--married, single, happy, unhappy...
On the other hand, families who want to adopt usually get little help, and there are many hard-to-place children in foster care.
If you as a consumer don't like a company's policies you can always boycott them.

Yes, if the aim is to promote adoption, money should be spent on the side of the adoptive parents.

Paying a woman to have a baby and then give it up...I can see many ways for that to go wrong, both as ethic and as policy.

 

[loveofourlord]

Here is a idea, why doesn't the catholic church and other groups that are so opposed to abortion actually do stuff to help these woman and support them fully. If they demand they have children then they should support them only fair.

 

[RDKirk]

How about before you start demanding more babies be put up for adoption have the catholic church and other agencies remove rejecting atheists/muslsims/protestants/LGBTQ from adopting. Can't on one hand say adoption is a option then reject anyone you don't like from adopting. You want to increase amount of unwanted children, but reject adopting them.

Your thinking is erroneous.

Let's say Catholic adoption agencies place 1000 children a year with adoptive parents, but only with traditional Christian parents, rejecting atheists/Muslims/protestants/LGBTQ.

So, because that's biased service, the government forbids those Catholic adoption agencies from placing any babies at all with anyone.

How did that increase the number of babies being placed in homes? Did the number of atheists/Muslims/protestants/LGBTQ applying for adoptions in non-Catholic agencies increase to make up the difference because of that action?

 

[RDKirk]

Here is a idea, why doesn't the catholic church and other groups that are so opposed to abortion actually do stuff to help these woman and support them fully. If they demand they have children then they should support them only fair.

I agree. That falls under the "widows and fatherless children" provision of both the Old and New Testaments. God is pretty adamant about that.

About 10 years ago, the pastor of the church we attended at the time made that declaration from the pulpit. Unfortunately, that proposal got dropped pretty quickly and was never heard again.

 

[Love365]

Women priests would be more likely to adopt children.

The Catholic Church still bans women priests.

 

[RDKirk]

Women priests would be more likely to adopt children.

The Catholic Church still bans women priests.

Can male priests adopt children? If not, why would women priest be allowed to adopt children?

 

[Valletta]

How about before you start demanding more babies be put up for adoption have the catholic church and other agencies remove rejecting atheists/muslsims/protestants/LGBTQ from adopting. Can't on one hand say adoption is a option then reject anyone you don't like from adopting. You want to increase amount of unwanted children, but reject adopting them.

It is wrong to adopt out children to homosexuals, I know that in Massachusetts they told the Boston archdiocese to either adopt to homosexuals or shut down adoption services, and they decided to shut down. Many Protestants and Muslims agree with Catholic Church policy, I suggest you have this discussion within your own religion.

 

[Valletta]

Women priests would be more likely to adopt children.

The Catholic Church still bans women priests.

God chose only male priests, in all of history, from Melchizedek to Aaron to the Apostles to today. This cannot be changed.

 

[durangodawood]

This is America. Its the companys job to make the most money possible for the executive suite and investors before they get out leaving someone else holding the bag.

How does "supporting adoption" advance that goal?

 

[Love365]

God chose only male priests, in all of history, from Melchizedek to Aaron to the Apostles to today. This cannot be changed.

Was Mary of Bethany a priest ?

Was Mary Magdalene an Apostle ?

 

[Skye1300]

Never mind.