From: jfh@rpp386.lonestar.org (John F. Haugh II)
Newsgroups: tx.politics
Subject: Re: The Big Debate *real long*
Date: 21 Aug 92 13:14:37 GMT
Organization: River Parishes Programming, Austin TX

[ Would someone please save this for later?  The pro-abortion people will
  be lying about adoption sometime soon.  You will need this article to
  refute their arguments. ]

In article <1684A3801.AHEMP01@RICEVM1.RICE.EDU>, AHEMP01@RICEVM1.RICE.EDU (Amy Hemphill) writes:
> >> [Lot's of stuff deleted: Sorry, Bill. Very well said, though. :)]
>  
> I wish I had the statistics for you in exact, but you are absolutely right. My
> mother is a social worker for the court system, specializing in adoption
> studies.  I can't tell you how many couples she's talked to who bewail the
> fact that they haven't been able to find a baby, then recoil at the idea of
> adopting a poor minority baby, or a crack baby, or an HIV+ baby, or any of the
> millions of babies literally dying for a home, many of whom are here because
> the mothers could not afford an abortion, and therefore also could not afford
> pre-natal and post-natal care.  But, these couples, supposedly dying to bring
> a baby into their homes, refuse to consider it if the child is not a newborn,
> healthy, white baby, which there are very few of.  So, then next time you hear
> someone talking about the shortage of adoptable babies, remind them of the
> babies who most need a home.  And please, those of you who tell me that every
> woman who has an abortion could feasibly use adoption as an alternative...give
> me a break.  Why should they ruin their lives and struggle through nine months
> of pregnancy, just to have adopting couples tell them their baby isn't good
> enough?  Feasible in all cases?  I think not.

This is part of a Mona Charen's column -

"Adoption myths are plain wrong

 July 2 -

 The Supreme Court's abortion decision had given rise to a great deal of
 shrill posturing from the pro-choice [sic] side.  Enforcing the
 Pennsylvania statue require women to wait 25 hours before undergoing an
 abortion means "women will die," according to the most febrile
 pro-choicers.  Many of us recognize such theatrics as manufactured
 hysteria, probably intended more for fund raising than for policy effect.

 But there's another kind of misinformation kicked up by the abortion
 ruling that is more insidious - because it sprints from deep-seated
 prejudices we all share.  These are the myths about adoption.

 When adoption is mentioned as an alternative to abortion, many pro-choice
 people think they can end the argument with a few quick jabs.  What they
 don't realize is that their cherished rejoinders about adoption are mostly
 ill-informed or just plain wrong.

 Myth No. 1: Adoption is a viable option only for totally healthy Caucasian
 babies under the age of 1 year.

 False.  Of 51,157 unrelated domestic adoptions in 1986, 50 percent were of
 children over 2 years old or with special needs like physical, mental or
 emotional disorders.  Moreover, the Nation Committee for Adoption
 maintains a waiting list of families eager to adopt Down's syndrome or
 spina bifida babies.  ..."
-- 
John F. Haugh II                   | Life's Little Instruction Book:
Ma Bell: (512) 251-2151            | "#138.  Learn Spanish.  In a few years,
UUCP: ...!cs.utexas.edu!rpp386!jfh |  more than 35% of all Americans will speak
Domain: jfh@rpp386.cactus.org      |  it as their first language."