Pro lifer means anti-abortion in this case. Yes they should be required to adopt any children currently in the system or any newborns who get placed for adoption. After all they do wish to make abortions illegal, or at the very least to heavily restrict access to them. This would force women to either get a highly dangerous back-alley abortion, or carry an unwanted pregnancy to term. Assuming she goes with the latter, she would likely not want to raise her child, thus forcing her into giving a baby up for adoption.
How would it work? All qualifying pro-lifers would have their names and locations along with contact information automatically put in a random drawing system. (adoptions by choice would still exist in this scenario), however if a child turns 3 without being adopted willingly. The government would go down a list of adoptable children and pair each one up with a random pro-lifer from the draw
who would qualify? Anybody over 18 who is opposed to keeping abortion legal. Exceptions could potentially be made for known abusers and violent criminals.
Anti abortionists do not want to live with the choices they make for others. They are eager to force people towards their point of view but will not take responsibility for that choice. They assume all of the burden should fall upon those who do not share their ideals, Or others who are willing to pick up after them. They take away the choice of others but do not want their choice of refusal be taken away. If they do not believe in the choice to have a particular pregnancy then it should be the right of the offended party to have reparation thus forcing the consequence upon those who have infringed their right to choose. They are not forced to have abortion if they do not want to except in some dreadful regimes but they freely will limit the choice of others. Anti abortionists claim the right of conscience without taking into account the conscience of others' choices.
They keep preaching abortion is murder and that adoption is the best way. If they force a woman to go through with an unwanted pregnancy, then they should have to adopt that unwanted child since they forced that woman to give birth and wanted her to have that child.
Most of the pro lifers see an unwanted pregnancy as a punishment,and while they'll do anything for the unborn, once it's born they don't care but that should change if they keep threatening a woman's reproductive rights and want those babies born. If a woman isn't allowed to back out, neither should the pro life protesters who want her to have this child and when it's born THOSE people should support it if the mother adopts it out.
I happen to work in an abortion clinic, and so often I hear the words "Don't kill your baby! Give it to someone who wants it! Adoption is the loving option!" and other such dribble screeched at my patients in an attempt to dissuade them from abortion. What they don't realize is that there simply aren't enough homes for those future children (aside of course, from the issue of the woman having a say in the matter). Many of these people have 5+ children on their own, and yet, despite these big families so many of them have only biological children. I would have no problem whatever requiring persons who take a definite anti-abortion stance to adopt at least one unwanted child if they wish to be parents. It would shut them up a bit perhaps having to actually deal themselves with the reality of the numbers and needs of these unwanted children and also lift a bit of the burden off the aching shoulders of our fostercare system.
I think there should definitely be a way to adopt out more kids, but in this cause what would the life for the child be? They would be in a home that wont want It or wont be able to support it. Then the fact that the parents gave it up wouldn't matter, because it would be in the exact situation.
Where does the logic in this come from? You all know that having a child is not purely accidental. If a girl does not want to give birth, or raise a child, they should not be careless and risk it. How is it a pro-lifer's problem if some careless, illogical, airhead has a kid, and doesn't want it? Yes, abortion is wrong. That makes me a pro-lifer.
Does that mean I want a kid right now? No, it does not. I know how to avoid having kids, and so do all women with an unwanted pregnancy. Forcing pro-lifers to adopt kids is like forcing people who support government to pay everyone's taxes, and not making anyone else pay them.
That's like saying because a woman spread her legs, it's my fault and I should adopt. Not because she did anything wrong and now I have to care about "her body." Well if she would have cared about her OWN body to begin with, her problems wouldn't be everyone elses. DEAL WITH THE CONSEQUENCES.
Just as people say dont kill yourself. Suicide is bad. Fix your problems. That also goes for not killing your children. Just clean up your act and you will be ok.
People who are pro-life, especially the extremist types should offer to adopt her child instead of shouting at her or preventing her entering an abortion clinic. By all means, never have an abortion if you think it's ungodly, but never make that decision for strangers! Those types of pro-lifers make my blood boil, metaphorically speaking.
If you force them to adopt, No guarantee that they will be in a good home. You can force someone to adopt, But you can't force them to be good parents. The kid will get good parents from the adoption system, They do their best to filter out all the pedophiles and most foster kids don't get messed up in the system. Also, The number of pro lifers drastically outnumber the number of foster kids, So you can't hook every foster kid up with a pro lifer.
Should pro lifers be forced to adopt unwanted children?
-Say I am Pro-Life. I believe abortion is wrong in some or all cases and think ending the life of an unborn baby is murder.
-You have a child you don't want. You have your kid instead of aborting it and put it up for adoption.
-Now, because I have an opinion that abortion is wrong, the government LEGALLY FORCES me to adopt YOUR child. Just because I have a point of view. Who knows how much money I have! How many kids of my own! If I could even be a good parent! Not only would a yes to this question be an infringement of personal rights of speech and opinions, and discrimination against conservatives and religious folks. A yes to this question would logically be very, very stupid.