Hello Senator,
I'm a fellow pro-life/anti-abortion citizen. But I feel a little sick about the abortion/ultrasound bill being discussed today on the senate floor. This bill reeks of emotional coercion toward women at a time when they need not persuasion to keep a pregnancy, but rather simple education regarding their options. Vast misunderstandings persist about the realities of the best alternative to abortion: adoption. Too many women get abortions simply because they do not feel ready to raise a child in a single-parent home. The research strongly validates their fears--kids generally don't fare as well in single-parent homes. I feel concerned that the abortion/ultrasound bill may contribute to some women ending up as hesitant, unwilling, unprepared single moms. Why not put more of your legislating efforts toward educating about and promoting ADOPTION rather than fighting abortion?
Showing posts with label adoption. Show all posts
Showing posts with label adoption. Show all posts
Wednesday, March 14, 2012
Tuesday, November 8, 2011
National Adoption Month
The word "entitled" gets tossed around a lot these days. Men and women of the world seem to believe they are entitled to self-seeking lives with such lifestyles sometimes resulting in unwanted pregnancies. Now consider the word "entitled" in this context: according to God's plan, "children are entitled to birth within the bonds of matrimony, and be reared by a father and a mother who honor marital vows with complete fidelity" (The Family: A Proclamation). I re-read Elder Andersen's talk this morning as part of my gospel study and felt again how important and sacred is the responsibility to raise up children. I applaud any woman who births a baby, especially those women for whom aborting the child might have seemed a tempting or viable option at some point in the pregnancy.
Furthermore, Elder Andersen's talk reminded me how vital for children to be raised in loving, 2-parent homes whenever possible. I am pro-child, pro-adoption. As November is National Adoption month, I want to take the opportunity to again declare that adoption is inherently part of God's plan for happy individuals and families. An individual birthmother may at times receive inspiration to single-parent her child, but in the majority of cases I believe the best interest of the child is to be placed in a loving 2-parent family. I know these thoughts might be offensive to some--but my convictions come from careful study of the scriptures, inspiration from the Lord, and even the latest in child development research, which shows children are much more likely to thrive in homes where they have both a mother and father actively involved in the rearing process.
Saturday, March 7, 2009
Apples and Oranges
It is a little nerve wracking to yet again put my political/philosophical musings out on a public venue (feel free to stop reading now if you don't appreciate these kinds of posts). But it feels empowering and healthy to voice my opinions. I am thankful to have what I could call an opinion of my own on most issues. Granted, my opinions morph over time, as I continually seek to learn and grow in understanding. 
As I have followed the latest Prop 8 proceedings, it appears to look more and more like this:
Obviously agreement will never happen when both groups begin a debate on entirely different trajectories. One steps out boldly waging a battle for “rights” and the other begins a path crusading for “what is right.” One is a matter of justice; the other, a matter of morality. Is it any wonder we have failure to find common ground?
It reminds me of the Prolife/Prochoice camps duking out the abortion issue. While prolifers may make reference to the rights of an unborn child, the true heart of their dilemma is morality vs. immorality—the “sacredness” of life. In other words, it is a moral, faith-based philosophy that triggers their passion. Is that how prochoicers see it? They reason from an entirely different philosophy, touting the rights of women to have control over their bodies, which is not comparable to the debate over life and death inherent in the prolife view. Furthermore, most in the prolife community would agree that a woman’s body is not her own to begin with—but rather, all people’s bodies are gifts from God and He expects them to be a gift well-used. Thus, there is not a common denominator between the two groups, even from step one.
In what might seem a tangent, may I also take this moment to encourage prolife activists to focus their efforts on positive reinforcement, rather than punitive discipline. Parents often find simply telling children “No—stop that!” is an ineffective route to change. Instead, most parents would agree that giving a child a positive alternative to the negative action tends to produce more prompt and lasting change. For instance, if a child is hitting a peer, rather than saying merely, “No! Stop hitting,” a parent would do well to follow up with: “Hitting is wrong because hands are for helping. What good things can we do with hands? We can build a tower using blocks, and we can stroke each others’ hair.”
So consider saying less statements like “Halt Abortions,” and instead more often promoting, “Place for Adoption.” Currently in the US, the vast majority of media and popular culture present two options for a single woman who finds herself pregnant: abort or raise the child on your own. The right to abort a child may always exist, and indeed I do not have hope of that right ever being overturned. But I do have hope that the United State’s culture will one day be more adoption friendly. All of us can begin now to battle the negatives surrounding adoption. Start by correcting the language you use. For example, instead of saying “giving up” a child for adoption, say, “place” a child for adoption. There are more examples of language correction found here. And if you want to educate yourself, or know someone who could use the resource, here is the best adoption site ever: the newly revamped LDS Family Services site.
As I have followed the latest Prop 8 proceedings, it appears to look more and more like this:
Obviously agreement will never happen when both groups begin a debate on entirely different trajectories. One steps out boldly waging a battle for “rights” and the other begins a path crusading for “what is right.” One is a matter of justice; the other, a matter of morality. Is it any wonder we have failure to find common ground?
It reminds me of the Prolife/Prochoice camps duking out the abortion issue. While prolifers may make reference to the rights of an unborn child, the true heart of their dilemma is morality vs. immorality—the “sacredness” of life. In other words, it is a moral, faith-based philosophy that triggers their passion. Is that how prochoicers see it? They reason from an entirely different philosophy, touting the rights of women to have control over their bodies, which is not comparable to the debate over life and death inherent in the prolife view. Furthermore, most in the prolife community would agree that a woman’s body is not her own to begin with—but rather, all people’s bodies are gifts from God and He expects them to be a gift well-used. Thus, there is not a common denominator between the two groups, even from step one.
In what might seem a tangent, may I also take this moment to encourage prolife activists to focus their efforts on positive reinforcement, rather than punitive discipline. Parents often find simply telling children “No—stop that!” is an ineffective route to change. Instead, most parents would agree that giving a child a positive alternative to the negative action tends to produce more prompt and lasting change. For instance, if a child is hitting a peer, rather than saying merely, “No! Stop hitting,” a parent would do well to follow up with: “Hitting is wrong because hands are for helping. What good things can we do with hands? We can build a tower using blocks, and we can stroke each others’ hair.”
So consider saying less statements like “Halt Abortions,” and instead more often promoting, “Place for Adoption.” Currently in the US, the vast majority of media and popular culture present two options for a single woman who finds herself pregnant: abort or raise the child on your own. The right to abort a child may always exist, and indeed I do not have hope of that right ever being overturned. But I do have hope that the United State’s culture will one day be more adoption friendly. All of us can begin now to battle the negatives surrounding adoption. Start by correcting the language you use. For example, instead of saying “giving up” a child for adoption, say, “place” a child for adoption. There are more examples of language correction found here. And if you want to educate yourself, or know someone who could use the resource, here is the best adoption site ever: the newly revamped LDS Family Services site.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)