Letters to the Editor

In her letter last Thursday, a pro-choicer said, "Right-to-lifers claim adoption is the answer to unwanted pregnancies. Maybe for a few months, until everybody who wanted a baby adopted one. Then we'd be right back to dealing with millions of unwanted children."

She makes a number of unfounded assumptions in this statement. Among other things, she assumes that the number of people wanting to adopt will remain constant. But that isn't true. First, an increase in the number of available children would lower the costs of adopting. This would increase the number of families that could consider adoption. The number of couples unable to conceive their own children is steadily growing. We also know that women often don't discover abortion-related infertility until they are ready to start a family 10 or 15 years later. The damage has already been done to their bodies, and women and girls who have abortions today may be the prospective adoptive parents of 20 years from now. And finally, since there is no longer the stigma attached to single-parent adoptions that there once was, this can't help but continue to increase the number of people wanting to adopt.

Of course, the real issue isn't the availability of adoptive families. It is the fact that abortion fanatics hate adoption because it eats into their profits. Abortionists and adoptive families are in direct competition for the same children.

I think children would be better off with families than dismembered by abortionists.

Today, lobbying groups are springing up, allegedly to reform adoption laws. They sometimes tell of a teenage girl who wanted to find the baby she had placed for adoption, only to be rebuffed by an "inflexible and heartless legal system" which denied her access to the needed records. The story concludes with her suicide.

If this story is true, its tragedy would be undeniable. But their proposed solution is to require that all adoptions be open adoptions. In fact, a bill recently introduced in one state would not only make all future adoptions open, but would open all that state's adoption records back to 1965! The bill does contain a provision for closing the records at the time of the adoption, if all parties agree. But all parties have to "re-agree" every 10 years. If, for whatever reason, any one of the parties cannot be located, the records are automatically opened.

Well, it turns out that some of these "adoption reformers" have ties to the abortion industry. And once that well hidden little secret was discovered, their strategy became as obvious as it is odious: The adoption reform legislation would enable abortion mill "counselors" to tell women that they can get a secret abortion, but not a secret adoption! Always keep in mind that no trick, regardless of how slimy, is taboo to abortionists if they think it will keep them from missing a sale. And to them, a lost profit is the one and only unforgivable sin.

Abortion proponents argue that adoption is not a viable alternative to abortion because it is too traumatic for the woman.

Excuse me?

This is the mentality of men who beat their wives or lovers to death. The attitude is, "If I can't have her, nobody else will either."

We tell those men to grow up. If they try to kill the woman, they go to jail. We expect men to have the emotional strength to go on with their lives, in spite of the pain of knowing that the woman they feel so bonded to is with someone else. We expect them to understand that they don't own their wives or lovers, even if they feel like they do.

But according to abortion enthusiasts, we can't expect the same of women. They are too hysterical and weak to accept the fact that their child is in a happy home. According to them, we can't expect a woman to live up to the same standards as a man.

The behavior pro-choicers applaud in women--killing someone rather than letting that person find love elsewhere--is considered reprehensible in a man.

I think pro-abortion people should apologize to all women for saying we are such powerless and despicable creatures. If women who support abortion are that way, they should speak for themselves.

In yesterday's pro-abortion rally, an abortionist spoke much evil of adoption.

Dave Thomas (the guy who owns Wendy's), Gerald Ford, and even Moses would probably find fault with her. They were all adopted and did pretty well for themselves.

All of us know people who were adopted. Many of us have adopted children. Frankly, unless the child is of another race, it is impossible to distinguish between adopted children and children born into a family.

One must wonder why an abortionist would speak evil of adoption. After all, it is an institution that has brought much joy to millions of families and children. Why would anyone be opposed to putting a child into a stable home? The answer is that every time a woman puts her child in an adoptive home, the abortion industry loses a sale. Every woman who sees options other than abortion is a lost profit.

If you are trying to adopt a child, watch when an abortionist drives by in his or her new Mercedes. It was paid for with the blood of a child that could have been yours.