Today in the nation there are over two million couples ready, willing and certified to adopt a child. I will say it again. Two million couples — certified. There are approximately one million abortions performed in this nation each year.
Now there are approximately one million abortions performed in this nation each year.
I confess that I am tired of listening to those in the press castigate the pro-life movement for not wanting to find "common ground" with our opponents on the abortion issue. Of course "common ground" from their perspective is that "we decide to agree with them because …. well, because." And of course they all want to discuss contraception and they want us to agree that Planned Parenthood should continue to get millions of tax dollars to feed the abortion industry. It is so tiring.
Add to this continuing braying, the last series of votes to increase abortion funding, to allow abortion funding in the District of Columbia, Mexico City, the U.N. problems, China, and one is tempted to remember the famous line from the movie Network.
But rather than simply complain, I will offer a real positive solution to the problem. Now I will predict that the pro-choice side will reject it out of hand. I will predict that that those who make their living killing unborn babies have no interest in ending abortion. But for the majority of the people in this country, the idea is sensible, logical, doable and will not cost a fortune. We have known about it for decades. It use to be the default position when someone had an unplanned pregnancy and the woman was not married. It is called adoption.
Now before you grown, hear me out.
Today in the nation there are over two million couples ready, willing and certified to adopt a child. I will say it again. Two million couples – certified.
Now there are approximately one million abortions performed in this nation each year.
So let us play matchmaker.
We just need to connect the one million or so mothers with the two million couples.
Now can't we all come together on this and agree to stop the killing and place these babies with these couples?
I mean what is not to like?
It is a win – win – win – win.
The mom wins because she does not have to choose to kill her baby and she is relieved of the pressure of raising a child when she is not ready to do so. The child wins because no on kills him or her. The couple wins because they get to adopt and share the love they have for another human being. Society wins because we do not destroy the next generation of human beings who just might possibly contribute to the betterment of the world.
So the next time someone talks about finding common ground on the abortion issue, suggest adoption. Tell them about an idea that makes everyone a winner. After all even President Obama claims to want to reduce abortions, or so he says. Here is a way for him to actually do something that would be life affirming and supportive of the future. It would be a change for him and give hope to us. And it would not have to cost the federal or state governments anything. The cost would be shared and borne by the families seeking to adopt. Organizations would spring up to help both the mother and the couple. Existing organizations would offer the means to facilitate such an effort.
Perhaps those who consider the population trends should think long before dismissing the idea. Those in government would be wise to review the concept. Since the abortion industry claims to support a woman's right to choose, what if the woman did not have the pressure to abort? What if she could get the help she needs and then place for adoption? Would not most mothers trade the difficulties of a few months for the sure knowledge that they did not kill their babies, but give their babies life and then allowed another couple to share their love with the child? I think most women, given half a chance, would never choose abortion. I think that they would choose life. "Choose life." It has a nice healthy ring to it.
Choose Life.
Adoption not abortion.
How about another win – contribution to the tax pool? Liberals love that stuff.
Total income from those aborted who would have reached the age of 25 and older, at the average per capita income would have totaled $3.3 trillion in total earnings since 1998 when those from 1973 would have turned 25.
Income and social security taxes on that would have totaled $166.5 billion, or 1.5% of our accumulated deficit.
That’s probably not big enough numbers to risk related campaign contributions.
The sheer size of the numbers is staggering whatever your position:
49,551,703 total abortions since 1973
Based on numbers reported by the Alan Guttmacher Institute (Planned Parenthood’s special research affiliate monitoring trends in the abortion industry) 1973-2005, with estimates of 1,206,200 for 2006-2007. AGI estimates a possible 3% under reporting rate, which is factored into the total.
That’s about 16% of our current population of 307 million.
Countries with less population than our total number of abortions:
S Korea – 48.7 million
Ukraine – 46.1 million
Spain – 45.8 million
Argentina – 40.1 million
Canada – 33.7 million
Venezuela – 28.4 million
Australia – 21.9 million
Greece – 11.3 million
Belgium – 10.8 million
Portugal – 10.6 million
Sweden – 9.3 million
Austria – 8.4 million
Switzerland – 7.7 million
Re: You Want Common Ground – Try Adoption
Choice is another policy that liberal/progressives support by reflex. A woman’s ‘right to choose’ to end a pregnancy is sacrosanct. Abortion is one of the high sacraments of the Church of Liberalism.
The drawback is that it flies directly in the face of their larger issue of ‘social justice’. Social justice may best be defined as the concept in which “justice” is achieved in every aspect of society, rather than merely the administration of law. It is generally thought of as a world which affords individuals and groups fair treatment and an impartial share of the benefits of society. Specifically social justice requires certain ‘rights’ or benefits be accorded to all of society regardless of contribution. Redistribution of income, progressive taxation, universal education, universal health care, universal housing, guaranteed income, and a guaranteed retirement: All these things are ‘requirements’ for true social justice within the liberal lexicon.
In order to supply such cradle to grave entitlements to the citizens of a country, one would think that this would come with a decided natalist attitude toward population. You cannot hope to fund such programs without a continual supply of newly minted young workers to populate the workplace and make their tax contributions to the federal coffers.
Several European countries are on the brink of facing a crisis of population. Several EU countries are birthing children at well below replacement rate. This leaves only two choices, neither one very palatable. First the country can continue down the death spiral of reduced population, and eventually go out of business. Second, they can ‘import’ their future workforce from a country with ‘excess’ population. Most of the countries with birthrates significantly above replacement rate have one other thing, besides excess population, in common. They are Muslim.
Ask any European politician, off the record of course, how the assimilation of those Muslim youngsters already imported into Europe is going and the answer will be ‘Not very well.” Just as important as population is to the continuance of a country is the make up of that population. As we are finding out in this country, overwhelming majorities of a single political stripe can have far reaching consequences to future policy. It is not so bad if the difference is choice between liberal or conservative philosophy. What if the difference is a choice between Western Law and Sharia Law? Can a nation import tens of thousands, or hundreds of thousands of immigrants and not expect them to bring political change with them?
I would much rather continue the debate between liberalism and/or conservatism as opposed to debating a rising population of Muslims as to whether we as a nation will ascribe to the Sunni or Shiite segment of Mohammad’s religion. Adoption is better than assimilation.