RE: Why are we more concerned with the unborn? (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Theology] >> Morality & Ethics



Message

earthless -> RE: Why are we more concerned with the unborn? (7/13/2008 6:18:56 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: stellaluna

So no one should try?

And what about fostering?


Of course - just adding some balance to the point made.



earthless -> RE: Why are we more concerned with the unborn? (7/13/2008 6:21:44 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: theo_book
In fact they are proccessing housing foreclosures at more rapid rates as they gain in experience, dumping even more children into the streets and parks. And they do not even provide police safety for the families.


Wait.. you're going off in a tangent. The bulk of foreclosures are for people that should have never been given a mortgage in the first place. That is the fault of banks but moreso on those buying houses that are way beyond their budget.

That's akin to buying a $100K car and then losing it after a few months of not making any payments on it. Then having to walk or take public transportation and having the media say, "look how cruel the auto industry is! This poor guy has to walk to work now!"

I guess Florida is not part of the U.S. where Section-8 housing is readily available, along with WIC/food stamps, etc..



Zhi -> RE: Why are we more concerned with the unborn? (7/13/2008 6:54:13 PM)

I'm not sure I understand the question.

It's not an either or thing for most people.

I am very concerned about the unborn, but I'm also concerned about poverty-stricken children who have been born. I sponsor 2 children through Compassion International, I've spent hundreds of hours volunteering with youth programs in the inner city, I've spent hundreds of hours volunteer tutoring at-risk kids in math, I've volunteered in food banks for families, etc.

I would hope most people are concerned with both.

The difference is that the battle for the unborn is a legal issue... it's currently legal to murder them by the millions. This is a very black and white issue... either you think it should be legal, or you don't. The battle for children in poverty is a resource issue, and there are many ideas regarding what will work, and what will not, politically. On a personal level, it's a matter of finding the time and resources to try to help.



stellaluna -> RE: Why are we more concerned with the unborn? (7/13/2008 6:59:59 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Leon_Figg3

Where is here?

It may help you gain a better understanding of the issue if you were to investigate and find out about the fostering, and adoption laws where you are at, not to mention your state's departmentof Children and family services. there are a number of reason why children, in the "system", are sent out of state. I have a cousin who grew up in Arizona who had to go through the "system" during a difficult time in her life because she became too much for her family to handle. She had gone through a number of foster and group homes that didn'yt seem to be able to help her. She eventually was sent out of state where she ended in a home where she was able to get some help.

Now, speaking as a former foster parent and an adoptive parent let me tell you that there is a lot to consider before you undertake the task of becoming a foster parent. You have requirments and hoops that you have to go through, and agree to just to be licensed. Aside from your background being investigated, you basically sacrifice a great deal of your time (more so than a natural parent) and even some beliefs because the child is basically a ward of the court and the state, and their interests overrule yours. Then there are the kids themselves some of whom have been in the "system" long enough to know how to play the "system" in the hope of getting back to their natural parents. Then there's the money and Medicare and Social Security. Then there are the natural parents, and the "system" you have to deal with when it comes time for visits. Then there's the relationships between the foster children and your children (if you have any).

Being an adoptive parent is a little better. However, if you have a child with special needs you and that child, that individual remains under court supervision indeffinately.

Yes. And?



Jhud -> RE: Why are we more concerned with the unborn? (7/13/2008 7:25:04 PM)

You folks seem to have drifted off in left field.

The primary difference betweeen the current concern about the unborn as contrasted to those in poverty is that there is not currently a court ruling that allows us to kill the poor when we choose to. If there were, presumably there would be equal concern over that - or at least one would hope so.



Peter_Gunn -> RE: Why are we more concerned with the unborn? (7/13/2008 8:40:55 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Jhud

You folks seem to have drifted off in left field.

The primary difference betweeen the current concern about the unborn as contrasted to those in poverty is that there is not currently a court ruling that allows us to kill the poor when we choose to. If there were, presumably there would be equal concern over that - or at least one would hope so.


I agree, Jack. However, I do see a correlation, but it's not being dealt with specifically...and it does apply to the OP. As for why we should be so concerned with the killing of unborn babies...as that becomes more and more acceptable and palatable, it will be easier to say who does and who does not live and die. The gate is then wide open! So, it's not totally inconceivable that the court system could allow for the killing of anyone that is inconvenient or unprofitable to society...like the poor among us.

Sounds insane now, but one would have said the same about abortion a hundred years ago. We have many proponents of "euthanasia" already.

So, if you care about the poor, the elderly, the handicapped, the orphaned...you'd better care a whole lot about what's going on in this country with the unborn! Because that looks like the first domino.



Roberta_ -> RE: Why are we more concerned with the unborn? (7/13/2008 9:11:43 PM)

I don't understand how we can let little children, elderly and disabled suffer either.



Peter_Gunn -> RE: Why are we more concerned with the unborn? (7/13/2008 9:55:58 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: DenimDiva

I don't understand how we can let little children, elderly and disabled suffer either.


Neither do I...and we are commanded to take care of these in the Bible. But when society finds it's able to "overpower" the weakest and most helpless and silent (the unborn), we become enboldened and it's easier to prey on the other groups. That can be preying, as in killing or allowing to suffer needlessly.

By getting that gate of abortion closed and not allowing it to open again, we can hopefully cut off the preying at the pass.



Jhud -> RE: Why are we more concerned with the unborn? (7/13/2008 10:26:07 PM)

quote:

I agree, Jack. However, I do see a correlation, but it's not being dealt with specifically...and it does apply to the OP. As for why we should be so concerned with the killing of unborn babies...as that becomes more and more acceptable and palatable, it will be easier to say who does and who does not live and die. The gate is then wide open! So, it's not totally inconceivable that the court system could allow for the killing of anyone that is inconvenient or unprofitable to society...like the poor among us.

Sounds insane now, but one would have said the same about abortion a hundred years ago. We have many proponents of "euthanasia" already.

So, if you care about the poor, the elderly, the handicapped, the orphaned...you'd better care a whole lot about what's going on in this country with the unborn! Because that looks like the first domino.


It's already happening through abortion. We currently eliminate up to 90% of Down's syndrome folks through selective abortion - it would be an atrocity of the worst sort if they were rounding up such people and gassing them, but as they do it while they are still in the womb, it is currently acceptable.

And incidentally, we did try to eliminate undesirables in this country once upon a time, through forced sterilization, not so long ago.



StephK -> RE: Why are we more concerned with the unborn? (7/13/2008 11:08:11 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Sideways

We are better off then many nations, but our poorest poor do not have food to eat, basic shelter, medical care. A reality check here, please.


The poorest of the poor most certainly do have access to food, shelter and medical care. It's the working poor who often fall through the cracks. There a resources out there though for them too.



mikejonesoftn -> RE: Why are we more concerned with the unborn? (7/14/2008 2:37:50 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: earthless

Is that really true though? A lot of concern, time and money (from Christians) goes to those considered poor in the U.S.

And yet the poorest poor here live like kings compared to the truly poor of other nations. Our poorest poor usually have several televisions, IPods, cell phones, XBOX360's, cars with expensive rims, latest jeans and kicks (gym shoes), etc..



Hmm. This is a serious question Earthless. What country do you live in and what is your definition of "poorest" poor? What you listed as examples are without a doubt expensive and a poor person couldn't afford them, therefor, your poor isn't... well poor.



Roberta_ -> RE: Why are we more concerned with the unborn? (7/14/2008 3:26:35 AM)

I think part of the problem is that we judge by appearances.

To look at me, many people wouldn't know that I'm broke. My dd has an iPod because she won it in a contest. I have a nice van that was given to me or I drive my sister's car, which is a Sebring. I have long fingernails because God gave me strong nails. As far as clothing, I have several t-shirts and jeans and one nicer outfit that I generally wear when I'm going someplace nicer. My dd has several nice outfits because they were given to her by a friend whose dd outgrew them.

That doesn't mean that I have money.



theo_book -> RE: Why are we more concerned with the unborn? (7/14/2008 6:59:12 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: earthless

quote:

ORIGINAL: theo_book
In fact they are proccessing housing foreclosures at more rapid rates as they gain in experience, dumping even more children into the streets and parks. And they do not even provide police safety for the families.


Wait.. you're going off in a tangent. The bulk of foreclosures are for people that should have never been given a mortgage in the first place. That is the fault of banks but moreso on those buying houses that are way beyond their budget.

That's akin to buying a $100K car and then losing it after a few months of not making any payments on it. Then having to walk or take public transportation and having the media say, "look how cruel the auto industry is! This poor guy has to walk to work now!"

I guess Florida is not part of the U.S. where Section-8 housing is readily available, along with WIC/food stamps, etc..


Yeh! SHAME on those kids for letting their parents make such bad judgment calls.



earthless -> RE: Why are we more concerned with the unborn? (7/14/2008 8:17:11 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: mikejonesoftn

Hmm. This is a serious question Earthless. What country do you live in


The United States of America.

quote:

ORIGINAL: mikejonesoftn

and what is your definition of "poorest" poor?


In this nation? For the most part the one I gave.

quote:

ORIGINAL: mikejonesoftn

What you listed as examples are without a doubt expensive and a poor person couldn't afford them, therefor, your poor isn't... well poor.


Exactly, that is the point. For the most part, the poor of this nation are not exactly destitute. What is being killed is the working middle class.



earthless -> RE: Why are we more concerned with the unborn? (7/14/2008 8:19:39 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: theo_book

quote:

ORIGINAL: earthless

quote:

ORIGINAL: theo_book
In fact they are proccessing housing foreclosures at more rapid rates as they gain in experience, dumping even more children into the streets and parks. And they do not even provide police safety for the families.


Wait.. you're going off in a tangent. The bulk of foreclosures are for people that should have never been given a mortgage in the first place. That is the fault of banks but moreso on those buying houses that are way beyond their budget.

That's akin to buying a $100K car and then losing it after a few months of not making any payments on it. Then having to walk or take public transportation and having the media say, "look how cruel the auto industry is! This poor guy has to walk to work now!"

I guess Florida is not part of the U.S. where Section-8 housing is readily available, along with WIC/food stamps, etc..


Yeh! SHAME on those kids for letting their parents make such bad judgment calls.


What should we do? Take those kids away from them because their parents bought houses they couldn't afford? They will have to live within their means and perhaps rent an apartment or apply for government Section-8 housing, etc. in this city the "poor" often times live a lot better than the working middle class.

We know people in $400K brick bungalows that are there with Section-8 paying $350 a month. While the working family will have to pay $3,000K a month in a mortgage for that same property.

But yeah..



stellaluna -> RE: Why are we more concerned with the unborn? (7/14/2008 9:21:30 AM)

I know of whom Earthless speaks. These are the people who live in falling down shacks and have a fancy car parked out in front with the biggest woofers and expensive sound systems, who stand in line for food stamps and use the Lone Star Card (we're both in Texas) that they just pulled out of their designer jeans. They're all over the place in my city, and in my poorer days I was pretty darn resentful that they could buy whatever groceries they wanted thanks to taxpayers and I was scraping together change for ramen noodles because I made too much to get government help.

There are truly destitute people in this country, but there are many more claiming to be poor who simply aren't.



Leon_Figg3 -> RE: Why are we more concerned with the unborn? (7/14/2008 9:58:56 AM)

And my point is that there is a lot to be considered even before you begin the process of becoming either a foster parent or an adoptivr parent. You sounded like some one who was putting down people for not becoming either without having any idea what all is involved. I was also trying to point out that there are a number of reasons why states send children out of state to get the help they need. The main reason being that for what ever reason not all states are equally equiped to deal with all the issues children tend to face or pose to the "system"..

Unless you have attempted to become either a foster parent or an adoptive parent you have no right to put others down, or demand that they become either foster parents of adoptive parents. Not all people/ families are equiped to be foster parents and deal with the "system"

As a foster parent you seem to be held to a higher standard, and greater degree of court regulation and supervision, than a natural parent even though the courts are set up and have the aim of returning children to their natural parents if at all possible.



stellaluna -> RE: Why are we more concerned with the unborn? (7/14/2008 12:31:30 PM)

Our local CPS office over the course of a year or so asked for time on our local TV stations and also put in our newspaper that foster parents were desperately needed. They begged over and over and then started sending local children to other parts of the state and to other states. It wasn't because the children could get better care; it was because people--any people--wouldn't step up and at least attempt to become foster parents. It's hard to do, but things that are worth doing are usually worth fighting for and what is better to fight for than the life of a child?

I looked into becoming a foster parent, but I didn't meet some of the requirements and now my husband and I are moving. (But we have already begun looking at the requirements for that state regarding fostering and adopting.)

I'm saying that the church is told to care for widows and orphans. It is easy to give money, but it is not easy to get your hands dirty and bring a child into your home. I would like to see more Christians at least attempt to do that.

(Also, there are two rather large orphanages--group homes--here that are run by churches. A friend works at one of them and says it's nearly impossible to get their kids adopted out. They have more and more kids there every year and they just built four new buildings to house them.)



theo_book -> RE: Why are we more concerned with the unborn? (7/14/2008 12:51:29 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: stellaluna

I know of whom Earthless speaks. These are the people who live in falling down shacks and have a fancy car parked out in front with the biggest woofers and expensive sound systems, who stand in line for food stamps and use the Lone Star Card (we're both in Texas) that they just pulled out of their designer jeans. They're all over the place in my city, and in my poorer days I was pretty darn resentful that they could buy whatever groceries they wanted thanks to taxpayers and I was scraping together change for ramen noodles because I made too much to get government help.

There are truly destitute people in this country, but there are many more claiming to be poor who simply aren't.


There are schemes and schemers all over the world who make it bad for the truly needy. You are correct in what you have said.

However, there are other schematoids out there stealing handouts intended for helping the needy, in the area of Workers who have been injured on the job. I imagine there are many others the readers can reference, who only make the problem bigger.



Leon_Figg3 -> RE: Why are we more concerned with the unborn? (7/14/2008 1:02:31 PM)

stellaluna,
Thank you for sharing and clarifying your experience, and stand on the issue.

I think, now, we are closer to seeing the issue along the same lines than we seemed to be at first.

I aggree with you that it is a shame that the church is not leading the way more on this issue than it seems to be. I think many issues would be different if the church led more on various issues rather than the same issues that it seems to continuously gravitate to. IMO the issues that the church tends to gravitate to are nothing more than symptoms of deeper issues that are being neglected such as the quality of life of the young. By quality of life I am not just talking about their standard of living. I am talking more about the influences in their life that help them approach life, and make decisions.



StephK -> RE: Why are we more concerned with the unborn? (7/14/2008 1:28:38 PM)

I have worked with the local trainer for foster parents and many people would volunteer but the intrusion of the state into their personal lives was more than they would or could do. I have also worked in several group homes and most kids there were not up for adoption because the state hates to cut the parental ties, even though that would be the best solution for the child. A lot of people don't realize that a lot of these foster kids are very street wise and have no problem making accusations to get what they want. I know of several foster families that were put through the ringer over abuse allegations that were not true. That kind of ordeal spreads through the community making other people who are willing to open their homes and lives to these kids get cold feet.

The problem comes down to the fact that the family has broken down to the point that parents are not there for their children and children not there for their parents when they get older. It's not a rich vs poor issue either. It is a sin issue at heart. God has a plan that works, it's called mothers and fathers, grandparents and extended families. When times got tough families were the safety net and took care of their own. If someone lost their home then a family member would let them stay with them until the other person got back on their feet. People have abdicated the family role to the government and look what has happened. The people who easily aborted and abandoned their own children will be the same people who will not want to deal with their aging parents. We are already seeing that with sending the elderly to nursing homes for their final days because no one wants to bother with doing what used to be common place. As the boomers hit retirement age the issue of the costs of taking care of the elderly will be a big one. It's not going to be pretty.



GregandJenny -> RE: Why are we more concerned with the unborn? (7/14/2008 10:55:31 PM)

^^^^^^
Steph you hit the nail right on the head! thank you

G



Sophie11 -> RE: Why are we more concerned with the unborn? (7/15/2008 1:08:37 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: StephK

I have worked with the local trainer for foster parents and many people would volunteer but the intrusion of the state into their personal lives was more than they would or could do. I have also worked in several group homes and most kids there were not up for adoption because the state hates to cut the parental ties, even though that would be the best solution for the child. A lot of people don't realize that a lot of these foster kids are very street wise and have no problem making accusations to get what they want. I know of several foster families that were put through the ringer over abuse allegations that were not true. That kind of ordeal spreads through the community making other people who are willing to open their homes and lives to these kids get cold feet.

The problem comes down to the fact that the family has broken down to the point that parents are not there for their children and children not there for their parents when they get older. It's not a rich vs poor issue either. It is a sin issue at heart. God has a plan that works, it's called mothers and fathers, grandparents and extended families. When times got tough families were the safety net and took care of their own. If someone lost their home then a family member would let them stay with them until the other person got back on their feet. People have abdicated the family role to the government and look what has happened. The people who easily aborted and abandoned their own children will be the same people who will not want to deal with their aging parents. We are already seeing that with sending the elderly to nursing homes for their final days because no one wants to bother with doing what used to be common place. As the boomers hit retirement age the issue of the costs of taking care of the elderly will be a big one. It's not going to be pretty.


I agree with this entire post Steph!



theo_book -> RE: Why are we more concerned with the unborn? (7/15/2008 8:25:17 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: dawgfan42

I was wondering something. As Christians we are fervent against abortion and more concerned toward the unborn. But I was looking at this one avatar that caught my attention. One in six children in the U.S. live in poverty. Meaning they do not have a place to live or enough food to eat. So I asked my fiance why are we more worried about the unborn than we are about children who really need a place to live and food?


While I am in total agreement with the direction this thread has taken, I wonder if we have strayed off track from the OP? Bear with me for a moment.

The problem is God never destroyed a nation for having poverty.
" For ye have the poor always with you; but me ye have not always." [Mat 26:11][Mark 14:7][John 12:8]

God did destroy nations for many wrongs, such as Homosexuality, idolatry, and the merciless slaughter of innocents, many times over. I think it is similar to "sudden death overtime" in sports; time to either perform with a winning strategy, or lose.

I fear we are losing this one.



FurGodWurLivin -> RE: Why are we more concerned with the unborn? (7/20/2008 6:52:51 AM)

My point of view...

Why are we so concerned about giving state-sponsered living quarters and three square square meals a day to people tied up in the appeals process after being convicted of murder when there are so many homeless people?

If you are a person such as me (and I'm sure several other people feel this way) that believes that abortion is murder, then you are attempting to compare a personal moral issue of bad parenting (failure to provide) to a passive agreement with murder (aka, the legalization of abortion). I for one am concerned about kids living below the poverty line... just like I'm concerned about the care of the environment. However, we need to have our priorities straight. Am I more concerned about murder, or every kid in America having access to cable television? Not a hard decision.

For the record, I kind of relegate my environmental concern to the same catagory as the "astronomically high" unemployment rate of 5.1%... which is lower than the "full unemployment" rate of 5.4% that Clinton posted in '98.

Adam



Page: <<   < prev  1 [2] 3   next >   >>



Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.5 ANSI