Thursday, January 22, 2009
They can do better, I think
I was watching the Norma McCorvey video at JT's blog, and after it was over, this kid's face turns up:
Now, before you hit "play", LANGUAGE ALERT, OK? It's very average YouTube fare. But I post it here for you to think about something. If you watch this to the end, his argument is that a baby is better off dead than poor. Think about that: he's proud enough of this argument to post it on YouTube.
Better dead than poor. And his back-up is "better dead than 'unwanted'" -- with the "pwn" that babies put up for adoption have no place to go.
Information always improves opinions, right? Here's some information: Since the end of World War II, interest in adoption primarily has focused on healthy, young infants. By the mid-1950's, the demand for healthy infants grew so significantly that it exceeded the number of children available for adoption, a trend that has accelerated with each passing decade.[adoption.com]
No snark for this one. I'm really stunned that someone would make this argument this plainly about this subject.
Now, before you hit "play", LANGUAGE ALERT, OK? It's very average YouTube fare. But I post it here for you to think about something. If you watch this to the end, his argument is that a baby is better off dead than poor. Think about that: he's proud enough of this argument to post it on YouTube.
Better dead than poor. And his back-up is "better dead than 'unwanted'" -- with the "pwn" that babies put up for adoption have no place to go.
Information always improves opinions, right? Here's some information: Since the end of World War II, interest in adoption primarily has focused on healthy, young infants. By the mid-1950's, the demand for healthy infants grew so significantly that it exceeded the number of children available for adoption, a trend that has accelerated with each passing decade.[adoption.com]
No snark for this one. I'm really stunned that someone would make this argument this plainly about this subject.