Justify women without health insurance staying pregnant

[GodLovesCats]

It seems to me every time pro-lifers say you can just adopt out your baby they always ignore the fact that during pregnancy there is a lot of expensive health care to pay for. Without health insurance, she cannot take care of herself and her baby. Why should having an abortion be a crime in America for economically challenged women without comprehensive health insurance, which is still a problem today? If you want to vote for someone because he is pro-life, your preferred candidate needs to be one who will fix the problem at all angles. It can't be just "The fetus is a human being, so don't kill it" without proaction.

 

[nonaeroterraqueous]

Just a few years ago, women gave birth without any modern medicine, and a few years from now no one will be able to defecate without a surgeon.

 

[John P. Alexander]

So, kill the baby to save money? How about not getting pregnant when you knew full well you couldn't afford it? There are many ways to not get pregnant. Also, humans wouldn't even exist if we absolutely needed the hospital to make it happen.

 

[GodLovesCats]

Pregnancies are often accidental.

What I am really getting at here is the government failing these women by not making sure they're able to keep their kids before and after birth.

 

[St_Worm2]

It seems to me every time pro-lifers say you can just adopt out your baby they always ignore the fact that during pregnancy there is a lot of expensive health care to pay for. Without health insurance, she cannot take care of herself and her baby. Why should having an abortion be a crime in America for economically challenged women without comprehensive health insurance, which is still a problem today? If you want to vote for someone because he is pro-life, your preferred candidate needs to be one who will fix the problem at all angles. It can't be just "The fetus is a human being, so don't kill it" without proaction.

Hello ChristianForCats, starting from the bottom up, you consider the intentional murder of an innocent to be a sin, yes? So then, are you suggesting that the sin of intentionally killing a defenseless, unborn child becomes ok somehow if we don't have the $$ we need to pay the bill

I can tell you from personal experience that there are options. For instance, our son is adopted. His birth mom was 18, pregnant, w/o parents and w/o insurance, but the State and a nearby crisis pregnancy center paid for everything, including all of her prenatal care.

If memory serves, adoptive parents were not allowed to help financially back then, because it would have at least looked like they were "buying a baby" if they did, but I believe the rules in most states allow for that now, to one degree or another. I believe that it is a rule that was also in place to make sure that normal couples (rather than just rich couples) were able to adopt.

--David

 

[GodLovesCats]

So under these normal rules all adopted children will get the health care they need and so will all of their parents?

 

[St_Worm2]

So under these normal rules all adopted children will get the health care they need and so will all of their parents?

How could I know that? This thread is about abortion and health insurance for those not aborted, yes, not ongoing health care for adoptive parents and/or their children.

That being the case I will ask one of my opening questions again, are you suggesting that the sin of intentional murder becomes ok somehow whenever we don't have $$ to pay a bill?

Thanks!

--David
p.s. - on the "normal" rules thing, quite frankly, the "rules" vary from State to State, and we haven’t adopted a baby for more than 20 years now, so I’m thinking that many of the rules may have changed.

"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​

 

[Go Braves]

Just a few years ago, women gave birth without any modern medicine, and a few years from now no one will be able to defecate without a surgeon.

Well to point out the obvious one of the leading causes of death for females for centuries on was childbirth, on account of the lack of modern medicine.

 

[SPF]

It seems to me every time pro-lifers say you can just adopt out your baby they always ignore the fact that during pregnancy there is a lot of expensive health care to pay for. Without health insurance, she cannot take care of herself and her baby. Why should having an abortion be a crime in America for economically challenged women without comprehensive health insurance, which is still a problem today? If you want to vote for someone because he is pro-life, your preferred candidate needs to be one who will fix the problem at all angles. It can't be just "The fetus is a human being, so don't kill it" without proaction.

It's immoral to have the abortion for the same reason it would be immoral for the mother of a 2 week old in the same financial despair to kill her 2 week old.

Abortion does one thing and one thing only - it kills a human being. It kills our nation's most innocent and defenseless children.

The morality of abortion stands or falls based upon the moral worth and value of the unborn child. Not upon the social-economic situation of the mother.

If you argue that the killing of another human being is acceptable because of a person's responsibility towards another human being, then why couldn't the mother of a 2 year old who just lost her job and is about to be foreclosed upon and become homeless wrong to kill her 2 year old? The principal you're establishing is the same.

 

[Yekcidmij]

Why should having an abortion be a crime in America for economically challenged women without comprehensive health insurance, which is still a problem today?

Because economic conditions are not moral justification for killing a human being. You can't kill a human and claim no moral culpability on grounds that you did it because you were "economically challenged."

It can't be just "The fetus is a human being, so don't kill it" without proaction.

Well, if it's a human being, that's enough to protect it's life, regardless of what politicians may or may not do. You can't kill a human on grounds that you did it because a politician wouldn't solve all it's future problems.

 

[GodLovesCats]

Are you suggesting that the sin of intentional murder becomes OK somehow whenever we don't have $$ to pay a bill?

Not at all. I am saying it is not enough for the government to ban abortions without also helping pregnant citizens get what they need to be moms.

 

[SPF]

Not at all. I am saying it is not enough for the government to ban abortions without also helping pregnant citizens get what they need to be moms.

Sounds to me like you're saying if the government isn't willing to pay for the prenatal and postnatal care for pregnant women that an acceptable alternative is to permit the pregnant women to kill their unborn.

 

[redleghunter]

Justify women without health insurance staying pregnant?

Women were having babies for millennia before health insurance.

 

[redleghunter]

It can't be just "The fetus is a human being, so don't kill it"

Why can’t it be the answer? YHWH is clear that the killing of innocents is wrong and will be judged.

 

[renniks]

It seems to me every time pro-lifers say you can just adopt out your baby they always ignore the fact that during pregnancy there is a lot of expensive health care to pay for. Without health insurance, she cannot take care of herself and her baby. Why should having an abortion be a crime in America for economically challenged women without comprehensive health insurance, which is still a problem today? If you want to vote for someone because he is pro-life, your preferred candidate needs to be one who will fix the problem at all angles. It can't be just "The fetus is a human being, so don't kill it" without proaction.

Midwives aren't that expensive. Unless there is complications you can just have the kid at home.

 

[redleghunter]

Pregnancies are often accidental.

What I am really getting at here is the government failing these women by not making sure they're able to keep their kids before and after birth.

The Roman Empire was horrible in having healthcare for women. As a matter of fact they did not help anyone at all.

Babies were still born during that time. Of course some were left out to die, and Christians rescued these babies. So rescuing unwanted children has been not only a biblical call but historic call for Christians. Governments have not been so keen at helping out families and children in crisis.

I guess my question to you is how involved are you (your church too) in the 10s of thousands of Christian ministries which support both pro life and ministering to poor families without healthcare and the means to feed and clothe their families?

In the US families who cannot afford health insurance are on State Medicaid. This goes along with the Children’s Health Insurance Program (CHIP). In addition to this are EBT cards, and in most places money for housing. Add to that the faith based (majority are Christian) charities, the US has the largest safety net of any nation given its size.

 

[redleghunter]

I can tell you from personal experience that there are options. For instance, our son is adopted. His birth mom was 18, pregnant, w/o parents and w/o insurance, but the State and a nearby crisis pregnancy center paid for everything, including all of her prenatal care.

And I’m sure the nearby pregnancy center was a Christian ministry.

 

[GodLovesCats]

I guess my question to you is how involved are you (your church too) in the tens of thousands of Christian ministries which support both pro life and ministering to poor families without healthcare and the means to feed and clothe their families?

I don't have a church or know about any Christian ministries that help women with no health insurance stay pregnant all nine months.

 

[redleghunter]

So under these normal rules all adopted children will get the health care they need and so will all of their parents?

The usual case is there are more qualified willing adoptive parents waiting to adopt.

My niece and her husband went through a two year certification process to be foster-adoptive parents. A year after certification (state requirements) they just received a call to foster their first child. Mind you on the application they wanted to be adoptive parents outright and specified “any age.”

 

[St_Worm2]

And I’m sure the nearby pregnancy center was a Christian ministry.

It was. It is, in fact, the reason that our son was adopted instead of aborted, and why his birth mom also wanted a Christian couple to raise him.

--David