This was published in the Warren Sentinel
When there are no orphans, anti-abortionists may become right
TO THE EDITOR:
Roe v. Wade, 410 U.S. 113 (1973) legalized abortion for the masses. Why are people so adamant that this law must be abolished? Religious stances, mostly, which have no place in politics, whatsoever.
As far as human rights go, I would much rather that a child dies than live a loveless, impoverished existence. I firmly believe that all pro-lifers, as a testament to their belief, should adopt some child with a genetic defect. I would like to see how their position changes.
Actions speak louder than words, pro-lifers. Who are you, or the American government, or your Christian God, to tell me what I may or may not with my body? I do not wish to confiscate any of your human rights, and expect the same in return. When there becomes no necessity for orphanages you may have a case. But as long as there are children locked up into these institutions, praying that "their parents may come for them some day", you have no case.
Adoption is NOT an option, but thankfully, abortion is.
C.M. Gaudioso
*******************************************************************
To the Editor: in response to the letter of C.M. Gaudioso.
As a child born and placed up for adoption just one year after the Roe v. Wade decision, I feel extremely fortunate not to live in the society you seem to feel would be ideal. You have in one letter attempted to undermine the teachings of parents to their adopted children, that they were given to people who could provide for them what their birth parents could not. My natural mother was obviously pro-life, thank God, and she loved me enough to assure I would have a happy, fulfilled life with two people unable to have children on their own. My parents have three children who, were if left up to you, would not be here.
So I ask you C.M. Gaudioso, can you look me in the eye and tell me I should have been aborted? Can you honestly tell the THOUSANDS of people desperately trying to adopt , regardless of the situation the child comes from, that they are out of luck because we killed all the babies who might have been eligible for adoption.
What orphanages/institutions are you referring to in your letter? In
This country, According to the American Public Human Services Association's estimates for 1999, there are Approximately 520,000 children in the foster care program. A program designed to give a loving, family like-home to children who, for whatever reason, could not get it in their own homes. Would you like to take all those children out and shoot them so as to save them "a loveless, impoverished existence?" Have you ever asked a foster child why he or she is there? If they want to go home? If not maybe you should not draw such drastic and uninformed conclusions such as
infanticide. Were it up to you, 520,000 HUMAN BEINGS, who might go on to be extremely successful and influential members of society, would not have been given the chance at life they deserve. Ask them if they would rather have never been born? Ask an aborted baby if it wants to live...oh yeah you can't.
Letters like yours are what prompts women to go kill their unborn
children. Letters like yours are what keep loving couples from being
able to adopt the babies they desperately long for. Actions do indeed speak louder than words and until people like you learn to put aside their own selfishness and learn to love their children enough to give them whatever they need, even if they themselves cannot provide it, more babies will die unnecessarily.
I assure you C.M. Gaudioso, Adoption is indeed and OPTION, for which I am living proof.
Ashley E. Flood
|
