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.
If there are so many people out there willing to adopt then why are there so many children in foster care. Wouldn't the solution to adoption be to adopt the ones in foster care first? Also I looked up the stats for adoption wait list, guess what can't find any factual ones so lets uses your made up numbers for a second. You say that texas has 12,000 people waiting to adopt. So lets use that 12,000 as a rough estimate and multiply that by 50. Remember i'm giving you the benefit of the doubt because most states are alot smaller than yours. So I get 600,000. Want to check it? So if all those people now on waiting list adopted then that still leaves 200,000 this yr alone that would go to foster care. Then next yr......You guessed it 800,000 ....oh what the heck i'll give you another 400,000 next yr. Wait so in two yrs that still leaves 600,000 kids going to foster care on my tax dollars. It is an unwinnable battle. There are not enough families to keep up with the demands for abortion, i'm not sure why you can't see that!
most kids who are in foster care are there on parent release of teenagers. There is no doubt there are many kids who are in foster care for years. The vast majority are teenagers whose parents released them to foster care.
only 25 percent of the kids in foster care are infants.
82 percent are adopted with in 23 months of entering
15 percent had been in care less than 1 month
34 percent had been in care for 1 to 11 months
23 percent had been in care for 12 to 23 months
12 percent had been in care for 24 to 35 months
9 percent had been in care for 36 to 59 months
7 percent had been in care for 5 or more years
Children in foster care live in a variety of placement settings and may move among or between settings while in care. For example, a child may move from a group home to a relative foster home. Point in Time. The estimated 510,000 children in foster care on September 30, 2006, were in the following types of placements:
46 percent in non relative foster family homes
24 percent in relative foster homes
10 percent in institutions
7 percent in group homes
3 percent in preadoptive homes
5 percent on trial home visits (Situations in which the State retains supervision of a child and the child returns home on a trial basis, for an unspecified period of time, are considered a discharge from foster care after 6 months.)
2 percent had run away
1 percent in supervised independent living
Trends. Placement type on September 30 remained relatively unchanged between FY
Permanency Goals
The preferred goal for children in care is permanency with caring parents. Permanency goals refer to the goals for permanent placement that are reported to AFCARS.3 Point in Time. Of the estimated 510,000 children in foster care on September 30, 2006:
49 percent had a goal of reunification with parent(s) or primary caregiver(s)
23 percent had a goal of adoption
8 percent had a goal of living with a relative or guardian
9 percent had a goal of long-term foster care
6 percent had a goal of emancipation
6 percent had not yet had a permanency goal established
key numbers here
49% had a goal to reunite with parents. add 8 % of being with a relative or guardian.
These are only kids who are not adopted as infants that get into foster care at all.
So when you take in adoption agencies for infants their never be 800,000 abortions to be that will get to foster care. Those that do 82% are adopted with in 23 months
Only 23 % had a goal of adoption
Let me remind you as an American I have every right to voice my concerns and try to get Roe versus Wade overturned.
the only thing being killed here is the unborn.
So you must approve of third term abortions.
let me remind you denying life to 49 million since roe versus wade is a genocide
When has anyone on this thread ever stated you don't have the right to voice your concerns and opinions? Sorry, but pro-choice does NOT equate to 'approval' of third term abortions! And it has been explained to you several times that there is no way current abortion laws add up to 'genocide'. for your further edification I once again post the definition of genocide from Websters online:
Quote:
Main Entry:geno·cide Pronunciation: \ˈje-nə-ˌsīd\ Function:noun Date:1944 : the deliberate and systematic destruction of a racial, political, or cultural group
Do you honestly see abortion as a 'deliberate and systematic destruction'?
Last edited by MsMcQ LV; 06-29-2009 at 09:04 AM..
Reason: further comment
Most people actually want the laws to be somewhere in the middle - on both abortion and guns.
Very few people want third trimester abortion on demand to be legal and a large majority of people don't want partial birth abortions legal, taxpayer funded abortions, etc. Very few people want all abortions banned in all cases. A lot of people have a problem with abortions after the first trimester, but think all first trimester abortions are OK.
As far as guns, very few people want felons and minors to be allowed to have guns. Very few people want no one to be allowed to have guns.
That is my point exactly. I agree with all of the above. We are people in the middle. The ones who can see both sides, but sadly that is not true for most. Take our friend mr wjtwet extremist as you can get, won't listen and refuses to admit there are other ways than his.
Opinions are just that. OPINIONS. They do not dictate the law.
And your opinion that third trimester abortion should be legal for any reason doesn't dictate/hasn't dictated the law either. Abortion restrictions, such as mandated counseling, 24-hour waiting periods, etc. are also a part of the law, contrary to what the pro-choicers want.
How do you think laws are decided? By lawmakers who are elected by people based on sharing opinions of what the law should be.
That is my point exactly. I agree with all of the above. We are people in the middle. The ones who can see both sides, but sadly that is not true for most. Take our friend mr wjtwet extremist as you can get, won't listen and refuses to admit there are other ways than his.
I'm in the middle more than mr wtjwet is, so you have to give me some credit there.
I HATE abortion - it's an abhorrent act and is disgusting, IMO. That said, I would NEVER want it to be illegal in all cases. I also tend to favor keeping a safe, legal option with reasonable restrictions, as long as it's strongly discouraged, over having a situation where women give themselves dangerous abortions and, thus, kill both themselves and the fetus.
And your opinion that third trimester abortion should be legal for any reason doesn't dictate/hasn't dictated the law either. Abortion restrictions, such as mandated counseling, 24-hour waiting periods, etc. are also a part of the law, contrary to what the pro-choicers want.
How do you think laws are decided? By lawmakers who are elected by people based on sharing opinions of what the law should be.
I didn't say that they should be legal for any reason, I said that we can't possibly know, 100%, what the woman's reason is..and therefore, we cannot place restrictions.
The vast majority of the time it isn't just for any ol' reason. In the end, a 3rd trim. abortion doesn't hurt me..but it is an awful thing if it's being done for convenience..IMO...however, I will NEVER know what a woman's reasons are for having a 3rd trim. abortion and neither will you. That's her personal business. Most women I know that have had 3rd. trim. ab's were incest, rape, or physical abuse victims......also women with medical issues.
When has anyone on this thread ever stated you don't have the right to voice your concerns and opinions? Sorry, but pro-choice does NOT equate to 'approval' of third term abortions! And it has been explained to you several times that there is no way current abortion laws add up to 'genocide'. for your further edification I once again post the definition of genocide from Websters online:Do you honestly see abortion as a 'deliberate and systematic destruction'?
I have been told several times to just live with to and shut up on this
thread
At what point does the argument for pro choice change. One moment it is a clump of cells that can be removed and that is not death. One moment it is a human in the third trimester you can not kill.
If the argument is that woman has every right to do with he body what she wants, then why is that argument not valid in the third trimester.
The argument is in the third trimester it is human and we should not kill it. Yet by not allowing abortion in the third trimester you are denying a woman the right to do what she wants with her body
My side believes it is a human the moment it conceives and implants itself.
that usually takes 4 - 5 days to fully implant. So I have no objection to the morning after pill.
pro choice says there should not be third trimester abortions because the unborn is a human, pro life believe s it is human once it implanted.
I HATE abortion - it's an abhorrent act and is disgusting, IMO.
Not when the woman is the victim of incest, rape, or domestic violence. It's also not like that if the woman has a medical roadblock (whether it be a risky situation or a dire one).
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.
