Quote:
Originally Posted by Josh
1. I have lost seeing usernames on here through the number of replies I have made, looking back your posts seem to go in and out of my replies to others who HAVE done this and thus naturally I may have transferred that on to you in the process. Therefore, everything I state should be seen as more generalized across every poster because it's kinda hard to keep track of who says what exactly.
|
When I debate, I analyze the posts and tend to base whatever arguments for that post using my own stance, evidence and lots of what that poster says. So, if that poster gives some experience as a non-adoptee, I probably used that in my responses.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Josh
And let me get this right, you say that guys should have equal say in all aspects of pregnancy as girls? Just want to make sure.
|
That's correct. If one gender is to have more weighting to each say just because of their gender, then it begs the question, why doesn't the weighted gender simply have a debate amongst themselves? If the other gender's posts will be down-played and ignored due to their gender, then might as well talk to the wall. Thus, for both genders to
co-exist in the debate, they have the same weighting in their says no matter what their viewpoints are.
2. As I see it one of the main issues we have to deal with now before we're able to further progress are older orphans. Many are adopting infants, as a secondary means of easing their own infertility; this is one of the primary reasons. However, older orphans get lost in the process because of this. We've already got orphans being taken in a lot in their infant lives, but towards the back end is where the most difficulty is going on. If the people are informed and reminded of this, we could perhaps see a rise in families adopting older children into their lives. This would in short help ease the overflow and it's the first step that must be taken. I'm kinda unclear on what you're asking - how to support the orphanages themselves as structures or the orphans that reside there while waiting for foster care? Then in provide more help and support, I mean put the money in to help orphanages expand with better care, food, living quarters, education, etc.[/quote]
I suppose it's my fault for not clarifying, however, what I meant was helping both the orphanages in general to function and the orphans and adoptees within them.
With adopting children, the current economy is rather shitty, and more people are having a harder time making ends meet, so I would guess that they wouldn't be adopting, at least not right away. For the ones that are financially stable, either both or one of the parents work, or if they're lucky, they inherited a fortune or do work from home, etc... . In that case, perhaps informing them would be a good idea, but it'd be even better if they were rewarded (aside from morally/ethically) for adopting. Give them some amount of money for adopting or reduce their taxes, or some incentive, aside from a moral or ethical one.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Aufschlitzer
If abortion were largely done away with, would the overflow problem become more significant?
|
I believe it would. If the woman or couple were/still are unwilling to have the child for whatever reasons, and abortion is disallowed, and assuming they don't go for a home-made abortion, then adoption becomes the main other choice. Suppose that the amount of current abortions per month or year choose to go for adoption, then that relatively high number adds onto the numbers in the orphanages. Perhaps there may be a few more or less given for adoption, however, I think the numbers would be ~ the same.