[QUOTE=Diogenes the Cynic]
But offering to give the money to a pro-life charity is a good way to reassure those who are thinking of sending money that their donation will still be used for its intended cause regardless of what this couple does.
[/QUOTE]
Color me skeptical that the money would actually go there. I believe that they said something along the lines of “maybe a pro-life organization.”
[QUOTE=Diogenes the Cynic]
What about this is a “scam?”
[/QUOTE]
I personally think it’s a scam in that there is no pregnant woman and no fetus.
[QUOTE=Blaster Master]
Adoption isn’t an option because “[she] doesn’t believe that she’d be able to give up a child after giving birth to it, and that’s not something [he’s] going to pressure [her] into doing.” Oh, so carrying the child for nine months won’t attach her, but a few hours of painful labor will?
[/quote]
Three months. They’re going to abort within three months, not nine.
Sorry, ignore my last post, I missed page 2.
I’m not going to argue with thise in this thread who don’t believe the claim is on the up and up. Obviously, if they’re lying, it’s a scam, but I see raising that possibility as fighting the hypothetical. My stance is that the proposal in theory is just fine with me.
To those who think the couple is lying, do you have a problem with this proposal in theory?
OK, in theory - I don’t have a problem with begging. But I don’t like what I read at the website (their justifications for why they deserve my money) so I definitely wouldn’t give to these people even if the story were true.
[QUOTE=Diogenes the Cynic]
I can’t see a damn thing wrong with this. I think this couple is briliiant. I support them all the way. I wish I’d thought of this. There isn’t any “hostage.” There isn’t any “baby.” This just asks anti-choice zealots to put their money where their mouths are. If they really have such a desperate need to control another woman’s body, then now they’re being offered a chance to pay for the privilege. If they really think a fetus is a baby then they shouldn’t have a problem with ponying up a few bucks. If they aren’t willing to come up with some cash, it just proves what frauds they are. Brilliant.
[/quote]
If someone held a gun to a victim’s head, and demanded money from me, stipulating that if I didn’t give them the money, then the victim would be killed, this would not create on my part any obligation to hand over the money. If I did not hand over the money, and the criminal subsequently killed the victim as a result, blame for the death of the victim would lay entirely on the killer, and not in the least on me.
Those who believe a fetus is a person or a proto-person or whatever should see the situation presented in the OP’s link analogously to the one I’ve discussed above. They therefore should feel no obligation to hand over any money.
-FrL-
[QUOTE=Diogenes the Cynic]
If you can’t have kids then no other woman has a right to teminate a pregnancy? What kind of logic is that? Nobody owes you a child.
[/QUOTE]
The type of pro-life logic that states every pregnant woman should be forced to have the child and if she can’t take care of it, let someone else adopt it. Cause we know pregnant woman don’t bond with their child and will never regret handing the baby over. They are baby making machines with no feelings whatsoever.
[QUOTE=kung fu lola]
I doubt that “pro-life” charities have any interest in helping out women who want to carry pregnancies but are too impoverished to do so.
[/QUOTE]
Actually, this is a pretty huge part of prolife advocacy nowadays.
There was a recent Time Magazine article about all the pro-life organizations out there who are trying to provide support and resources to pregnant women.
I don’t think The Nurturing Network or Birthright take any official political stance but I’ve known plenty of pro-lifers who are involved in those kinds of organizations.
As for this website, it definitely sounds like a scam. The guy just comes across as much too apathetic about the issue (“eh, it could go either way…whatever”) for me to believe it’s legit.
But then again, I never give any money to all those God-fearing war veterans with four hungry kids (according to their cardboard signs) either.
Maybe someone should contact Paypal about this?
[QUOTE=kung fu lola]
I doubt that “pro-life” charities have any interest in helping out women who want to carry pregnancies but are too impoverished to do so.
Charities who support mothers living in poverty are food banks, family resource centres, toy-lending libraries and vocational training programs that offer free daycare.
[/QUOTE]
Are you kidding? That is one of the main missions of Catholic Charities. Here are descriptions of some of the ministries CC runs in New York, for example.
At my parish, we have a little local organization that does the same thing…helps expectant mothers with job training, housing, food & clothing, etc. This goes on at churches (Catholic and Protestant) all over. Protesting at abortion clinics & such is not the main thrust of these groups.
Why is that most people who identify as pro-life also routinely vote for the party which is the most hostile to single mothers and poor families? Catholic Charities does not impress me. I want to see some broad, meaningful, political support for things like universal health care, subsidized day care, drug treatment, support for public schools and other policies which would prioritize underprivileged children over Halliburton or stopping queers from kissing.
Oh, and while I’m at it, why is it that most of those who claim to be pro-life have no problem at all with incinerating children for no reason in Iraq?
No one who votes Republican has any credibility claiming they care about human life.
[QUOTE=Diogenes the Cynic]
Why is that most people who identify as pro-life also routinely vote for the party which is the most hostile to single mothers and poor families? Catholic Charities does not impress me. I want to see some broad, meaningful, political support for things like universal health care, subsidized day care, drug treatment, support for public schools and other policies which would prioritize underprivileged children over Halliburton or stopping queers from kissing.
[/QUOTE]
I wouldn’t know the answer to your question, because the people I know who volunteer for these types of organizations overwhelmingly vote for the Democrats. I’m from a different pro-life kind of culture than the Bible-belters…urban Catholics are historically Democratic, and not only is that true of both sides of my family, but it’s true of my community, as well. So, put away your broad brush, Diogenes. The reason Catholic Charities doesn’t impress you is because you believe in government help, not private. That’s fine, it’s your political philosophy. But that doesn’t mean that all of the people who volunteer time & donate money to these causes aren’t helping the needy.
People complain that the pro-lifers don’t help the mothers who need it, and then when I demonstrate that many of them do, that isn’t good enough, either.
[QUOTE=Sarahfeena]
I wouldn’t know the answer to your question, because the people I know who volunteer for these types of organizations overwhelmingly vote for the Democrats. I’m from a different pro-life kind of culture than the Bible-belters…urban Catholics are historically Democratic, and not only is that true of both sides of my family, but it’s true of my community, as well. So, put away your broad brush, Diogenes.
[/quote]
Only a minority of those who identify as pro-life vote Democrat.
I believe in BOTH public and private responsibility. I wasn’t trying to knock Catholic Charities, per se. I have done volunteer work myself for Catholic Charities, just like I’ve volunteered for the Salvation Army, for food banks, for after-school programs, for summer day camps and for numerous other thing. Volunteer work has been an important part of my life since chilhood. It’s not enough, though. My remark about CC was not intended as a comment that such organizations are bad, but that they are inadequate to what is needed. They’re a band aid on cancer.
If they donate some money or time to single mothers but then vote for the party and policies which have disenfranchised and villified single mothers in the first place, then I see their “help” as disingenuous and cosmetic.
Incidentally, one of the best ways to prevent abortions would be to provide massive education about – and easy access to – birth control, but social conservatives once again surrender all moral crediblity when they not only oppose providing access to birth control (including emergency contraception which could prevent an unwanted pregnancy at the most critical time) but also obstruct attempts to educate teenagers about birth control, irresponsibly insisting on substuting ineffective and dangerous “abstinence only” moralization for real information.
[QUOTE=lavenderviolet]
I don’t think The Nurturing Network [or] Birthright take any official political stance but I’ve known plenty of pro-lifers who are involved in those kinds of organizations.
[/QUOTE]
Consumer Watch: Deceptive Crisis Pregnancy Centers (Cleveland Birthright is listed)
My mother works for the hospital in my town. I can’t speak on other Birthright centres (from what I gather, they are all only loosely affiliated), but the nurses there consider Birthright to be a scam and a cesspool of misinformation.
They have also been known to turn away pregnant women in need who did NOT seek “counselling” at the beginning of their pregnancy. One wrote into the newspaper enraged that she was denied assistance because she’d never considered abortion and her baby wasn’t one of their trophies in the struggle against reproductive rights.
Back on topic, I would donate if I knew it weren’t a scam. Every baby deserves a minivan. 
[QUOTE=Annie-Xmas]
The type of pro-life logic that states every pregnant woman should be forced to have the child and if she can’t take care of it, let someone else adopt it. Cause we know pregnant woman don’t bond with their child and will never regret handing the baby over. They are baby making machines with no feelings whatsoever.
[/QUOTE]
Don’t forget that it’s neither difficult nor dangerous to carry and deliver a baby.
[QUOTE=bluethree]
Don’t forget that it’s neither difficult nor dangerous to carry and deliver a baby.
[/QUOTE]
And every single adopted child lives happily ever after. They suffer no ill effects from being rejected by their birth parents, and are never abused, tortured, molested, returned or killed.
[QUOTE=Diogenes the Cynic]
Only a minority of those who identify as pro-life vote Democrat.
I believe in BOTH public and private responsibility. I wasn’t trying to knock Catholic Charities, per se. I have done volunteer work myself for Catholic Charities, just like I’ve volunteered for the Salvation Army, for food banks, for after-school programs, for summer day camps and for numerous other thing. Volunteer work has been an important part of my life since chilhood. It’s not enough, though. My remark about CC was not intended as a comment that such organizations are bad, but that they are inadequate to what is needed. They’re a band aid on cancer.
[/QUOTE]
I agree that private and public organizations are both needed. The point I was answering with the link to Catholic Charities was kung fu lola’s statement:
…which is clearly false. Plenty of pro-life charities do exactly that. Whether they are adequate to the problem at hand is a different issue altogether. If we had more people around, like you, who regularly volunteer, we would need a lot less public aid, and IMO, that would be a good thing. We will never be in a position to do away with public programs, I’m sure, but the more we can get individuals to get involved on a personal level, the better off we are. If for no other reason than it teaches compassion.
Oh, I think that’s kind of unfair. I don’t think anyone who goes out of their way to help on a personal level is doing anything deliberately to disenfranchise and villify single mothers, even in their voting habits. Many people vote a “pro-family” platform because they believe it helps people, not hurts them. Even if you personally believe this is dead wrong, you can’t necessarily ascribe evil motives.
To be honest, I don’t know if we have found the “best” way to prevent abortions. I think this information would help, but I actually do believe that strong families help, too, along with good educations and other motivations to succeed in life. It’s not just about birth control, it’s the motivation to use it. If we gave girls vision of what they can accomplish in life, I think it would go much farther than just some boring lecture in health class, and a demonstration of how to roll a condom onto a banana.
[QUOTE=Johnny L.A.]
Oral Roberts. He claimed God would ‘call him home’ if he didn’t raise eight megabucks.
[/QUOTE]
Having that Moral Minority in your power structure is very useful.
[QUOTE=Annie-Xmas]
And every single adopted child lives happily ever after. They suffer no ill effects from being rejected by their birth parents,
[/QUOTE]
I’m adopted, as are several family members and friends. I’ve never seen this problem of feeling rejected…certainly not among those who were adopted as infants. (I can’t speak to older adoptions, which I think do have much more potential for those kinds of problems.)
If you substitue “abandoned” for “returned,” I would say there is probably no higher incidence of these things among adopted families than there are among birth familes. Again, unless you consider under the term “adoption” older children who are adopted by their mom’s new husband, or other similar circumstances.
[QUOTE=Sgt Schwartz]
Those are the worst fucking idiots I have ever heard of. I am so pissed off right now, I am shaking. I can’t believe the nerve of some people. My wife and I can’t have kids of our own, so we have to adopt. Financially, we can’t do it right now. I know you get the money back, but you have to pay the fees up front. Then these two fuckheads threaten to kill a potential child that my wife and I could raise unless we PAY them. I would pay for that sorry fuck’s public castration! I would pay to see that stupid cunt have her womb immolated. At times like this I really wish there was a hell so these two assholes could be sent there for eternity. I know it is probably not real, but how the fuck could anybody think this is a good idea?
**FUCK!!! **
Sgt Schwartz
[/QUOTE]
OK, Adoptive mom rant time.
Sorry about your infertility. Been there, done that, sucks.
Any child you adopt will be “your own”
No woman owes you a child. Fertile women are not a baby breeding factory for the infertile. Go read “A Handmaids Tale” repeatedly until you understand this.
Adoptions are expensive, particularly if you want a healthy white baby. Some of this is graft, some of this is completely unfair, some of these is because the paperwork and process for homestudies, the medical fees incurred by a Mom in Guatemaula without health insurance, the costs of raising the baby for three months until you get there, and the cost to keep the other Guatamaulan kids in the orphanage is expensive. In the U.S. a lot of agencies spend a lot of funds on birthmother education and counseling.
For a fairly inexpensive adoption without graft, look into Korean adoption. Our son was adopted almost nine years ago now, so things have probably changed a littly Note that there is also a fairly significant tax credit that will further lower your fees. Many companies also offer an adoption benefit. If you can’t swing the costs of an inexpensive international adoption after the tax credit, you won’t be able to afford formula, diapers and daycare. Sorry, I’ll never get the “adoption is so expensive we can’t afford it” argument - Adoption expenses were dwarfed by income loss from maternity leave, daycare costs (in our case, one parent becoming a SAHP in others), and baby costs in the first two years. Put all the money you’ll spend on the baby into the adoption fund, and you’ll have it paid for in a year or two.