Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
That's a good point. Maybe we should extend the requirement to all couples straight or gay.
I already know what people are going to say. That's imposing on people's freedoms and all that stuff. I realize the problems with my proposal. I retract it. I thought I had something here but I don't.
Oh, OP - you have to develop a really thick skin to post on internet forums and this forum in particular can be harsh.
I don't necessarily agree with equating abortion and homosexuality but your ideas are your ideas.
There are about 1 million abortions a year. So maybe, the first year all could POSSIBLY get adopted IF every same sex couple adopted. What happens in the second year? The third? The fourth?
There simply aren't enough couples to adopt 1 million children a year. There were approximately 150,000 adoptions last year. That number includes inter family, and inter country adoptions.
The numbers simply don't add up.
There is no way it would make that much of a difference if SS couples could adopt, or even if gay singles could adopt as well. While the radical right tries to impress to their masses, that there are armies of gay couples trying to adopt, and corrupt the world, a very small percent of gay couples actually do adopt.
I've done a bit of research on this issue and have come up with a new, slightly modified counter proposal:
Couples, gay or straight, should be encouraged to adopt at least one child if they are considering having children (It's not a requirement this time. I'll admit that what I've said earlier might have been a bit extreme). Perhaps more campaigns and other types of programs educating and advertising to potential parents that adoption might be a better way to start a family rather than having one the natural way. They could always have a second child the natural way if they so choose.
I think we will need to make it much easier for people to adopt in this country (the article I found suggests streamlining the adoption process). I could say incentives could be given but people abuse the system and sometimes the children might end up being abused or neglected. Along these lines I also suggest a way for social services to get updates on the prospective parents both before and after adoption. Just a once a year or a once a month visit to check up on things at least for a while.
I also suggest making it harder for US citizens to adopt non-US children. I also know how cruel this sounds. People are dying in other countries. However, my purpose is to relieve the amount of unwanted, abandoned and orphaned children in the US while trying to come to a compromise so some sacrifices might have to be endured. This seems to already be happening to an extent with countries such as Russia preventing adoption from US parents. I'm not saying we should completely cut off children from other countries we should just try to make things a little easier here. That way we could alleviate some of the pressure our system is having with the influx of orphans and children who are unwanted or unable to be taken care of.
I’d also like to suggest making programs involving education for children approaching puberty about sex and reproduction a lot better and more effective. That along with more clinics that provide different types of contraceptives as well as adult education and counseling. This way people will be more educated and prepared for when they do have children.
A better strategy for reducing the number of abortions would involve looking at the reasons why women have them. According to a Guttmacher study, 73% of women who have abortions in the United States say that they can't afford to do otherwise. Promoting universal health care and streamlining the adoption system could give these women choices that they do not presently have.
Comprehensive safe sex education, promoting both abstinence and safe sex practices, would also be effective in reducing the number of abortions by reducing the incidence of unplanned pregnancy as a whole.
As for some things that weren't covered like it being unfair to force a woman to fully go through with the pregnancy and certain circumstances that might require an abortion such as the mother or the child being at risk and rape, I think I understand where you are coming from. I just can't think of any way to include that into my proposal.
In my research (also from the responses to my original post) I have found a lot of problems with my original proposal and even the counter proposal will most likely have flaws. I know that encouraging adoption won’t stop unsafe, illegal or DIY abortions from happening (if it ever comes to a point where they restrict or even ban it). I also realize from the research that maybe I am trying to connect two issues that can't be connected in the ways I think. I'll also admit that the issue could be a lot less complicated than I think. If you must, take it as a suggestion.
P.S. Apparently my skin wasn't as thick as I thought.
I've done a bit of research on this issue and have come up with a new, slightly modified counter proposal:
Couples, gay or straight, should be encouraged to adopt at least one child if they are considering having children (It's not a requirement this time. I'll admit that what I've said earlier might have been a bit extreme). Perhaps more campaigns and other types of programs educating and advertising to potential parents that adoption might be a better way to start a family rather than having one the natural way. They could always have a second child the natural way if they so choose.
I think we will need to make it much easier for people to adopt in this country (the article I found suggests streamlining the adoption process). I could say incentives could be given but people abuse the system and sometimes the children might end up being abused or neglected. Along these lines I also suggest a way for social services to get updates on the prospective parents both before and after adoption. Just a once a year or a once a month visit to check up on things at least for a while.
I also suggest making it harder for US citizens to adopt non-US children. I also know how cruel this sounds. People are dying in other countries. However, my purpose is to relieve the amount of unwanted, abandoned and orphaned children in the US while trying to come to a compromise so some sacrifices might have to be endured. This seems to already be happening to an extent with countries such as Russia preventing adoption from US parents. I'm not saying we should completely cut off children from other countries we should just try to make things a little easier here. That way we could alleviate some of the pressure our system is having with the influx of orphans and children who are unwanted or unable to be taken care of.
I’d also like to suggest making programs involving education for children approaching puberty about sex and reproduction a lot better and more effective. That along with more clinics that provide different types of contraceptives as well as adult education and counseling. This way people will be more educated and prepared for when they do have children.
As for some things that weren't covered like it being unfair to force a woman to fully go through with the pregnancy and certain circumstances that might require an abortion such as the mother or the child being at risk and rape, I think I understand where you are coming from. I just can't think of any way to include that into my proposal.
In my research (also from the responses to my original post) I have found a lot of problems with my original proposal and even the counter proposal will most likely have flaws. I know that encouraging adoption won’t stop unsafe, illegal or DIY abortions from happening (if it ever comes to a point where they restrict or even ban it). I also realize from the research that maybe I am trying to connect two issues that can't be connected in the ways I think. I'll also admit that the issue could be a lot less complicated than I think. If you must, take it as a suggestion.
P.S. Apparently my skin wasn't as thick as I thought.
The reason for posting is to gain insight. An original thought is far more important than toting the party line. Those that critized you for posting are the usual dead-heads that wouldn't recognize an original thought if it hit them up-side the head...
post your thoughts and ideas... way better than being brain-dead.
The reason for posting is to gain insight. An original thought is far more important than toting the party line. Those that critized you for posting are the usual dead-heads that wouldn't recognize an original thought if it hit them up-side the head...
post your thoughts and ideas... way better than being brain-dead.
I like trying to think outside the box a little bit. Whether it works or not is a different story. At least it's something.
florida.bob, I read the article but I'm not completely sure how I feel about it. I think there needs to be education for the younger set and a combination of education and some kind of pregnancy planning kits for the older set (maybe the states can decide what age is too young or too old, I don't know). If birth control and other protections are involved then so be it. Planned Parenthood isn't just about abortion.
It has to be their sons. their genes and their name.
Quote:
Couples, gay or straight, should be encouraged to adopt at least one child if they are considering having children (It's not a requirement this time. I'll admit that what I've said earlier might have been a bit extreme). Perhaps more campaigns and other types of programs educating and advertising to potential parents that adoption might be a better way to start a family rather than having one the natural way. They could always have a second child the natural way if they so choose.
Most couples won't go for it. They want their own baybees, especially men. The fruit of their loins is far superior to the fruit of other loins, dontcha know?
It has to be their sons and their genes and their family name.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
