If you are Pro-Life, would you rather adopt a pregnant mother's triplets, or would you rather see her get an abortion?

Question

This was a scenario @T-8900 brought up. I also used it in my third MyTake on this: The OTHER Last Abortion and "Pro-Life is Stupid" Argument I Feel Like Having , along with other questions on here about this stupid issue. I thought this scenario was really was a good test for people who CLAIM they care about "not seeing babies murdered."

So this is the scenario. Your next door neighbor got pregnant even though she used protection. She's going to have triplets, but never wants to be a mother in her entire life and wants an abortion. She's either going to get an abortion, or will consider birthing the triplets if there is a legally-bound contract that someone responsible can raise the children for her.

So, are you willing to raise three triplets, or at least help find a a suitable foster parent, or let her get the abortion? Those are your only options. If you're unwilling to help her, then STFU and stay out of her business.

For the record, this GAG user did say he'd raise the children. So I can respect his argument more than most on the pro-life side. @Stoner710 said something kind of similar.

AndyFo · Accepted Answer

I can't say I am pro-life nor can I say I am pro abortion I have always been on the middle of the spectrum. I believe a woman should have the choice to decide if she wants to bring children into this world and at the same time I am against if they take too long and the babies grow to a point where life could be viable outside the body. In my opinion it is one thing to abort an embryo but a whole other when the child is already formed. At the end of the day I won't stand and stop a woman from doing what she feels she has to do but I do have my reservations.

Truth is, if you don't ever want to be a parent and you still want to have sex than get a procedure that makes it impossible to have children. Otherwise, the inherent risk is always going to be there and this is a well known fact before people have intercourse. No procedure is 100% of course but its more likely to work than a condom or a contraceptive. A womans body is hers and hers alone, but, reguardless, you have to take responsibility for putting yourself in the situation. Thats a large reason why this debate is still as hot now as it was ten years ago.

Obviously, this does not apply to situations involving rape and I am not saying it should. I don't feel like I should have to add this in but if I don't than someone is gonna accuse me of being pro rape.

lightbulb27 · Accepted Answer

im not pro life and I'd adopt them. but there's a limit to that obviously as my nerves can only handle so much. I'd appreciate if someone could handle the first 3 years...

Lets be honest and say what abortion is... were killing our own offspring before they breathe.
Lets be honest and say we can't force a person to care for someone else...
and honest we know the consequences of not raising that child well and giving them support in this world.
and honest we aren't going to find homes for a lot of these kids if the parents reject them

We need to teach responsibility again, put it into society. We need to start beating people for being irresponsible. there are no answers to some of these messes humans create. Jesus likely walked by babies thrown to and eaten by dogs, only so much a person can do. Humanity just hasn't evolved so much, the damage is hard to fix.

p. s not to many other animals are as messed up as humans, we should learn from the other animals.

razelove · Answer

I vote republican for the fiscal policies. I'm pro-choice for the relationships I'm in. If other women want to get abortions, that's fine. If my state wants to restrict abortions, that's fine too, as when I'm establishing a long term relationship with a woman, I want to make babies. If it means I need to "take responsibility" then it's another anchor to keep her around rather than one that keeps me locked down. US identity may be difficult to reproduce, but using my passport to make another identity in another country and gain a new identity at the border as a migrant is pretty damned easy.

Your question is phrased as a gotcha, but you have to weigh probability before tossing it out there. It's improbable to knock a woman up with triplets, it's even more improbable to have them all come as a matched set. That could only happen if a family member was knocked up with triplets and threatening to abort if you don't adopt them.

If a woman I'm screwing had triplets I'd be like bwaha! Now you have to wear dog ears! Not only did I knock you up, but you have a whole litter on the way, you're my bitch now! Otherwise yeah, go get an abortion or whatever if they're not mine.

There are me problems and everyone else problems, abortion falls under the everyone else problems, so do it, or don't, I don't care unless I knocked you up and gave you my real name. Then it's a me problem.

Mermaidess · Answer

To be honest, it really depends on the gestation period.
If we're talking about a 5th week gestation period, then at that time the embryo does neither has cognitive brain activity nor neurotransmission of synapses or any form of electrical brain activity and is thus not yet a life. A person with completely no brain activity is legally and medically declared dead, so an embryo in this stage is not a life yet.

If we're talking about a fetus in the 39th week, then it is a fully developed baby. Abortion at this stage is no different to murder.

If we're talking about a fetus in the 2nd trimester- that is where the conflict is. More precisely, after electrical brain activity but before cognitive brain activity. I believe a lot of people can agree that this is where the difference between what's ethical and what's legal lies. Personally, I would say abortion after the development of electrical brain activity is unethical, but I believe women should be given the legal rights to carry on with an abortion. After cognitive brain activity however, I believe people should not proceed with an abortion except in extreme cases.

To answer your question, if it is between the the development of electrical brain activity and cognitive brain activity, I wouldn't really think much of it. If it is after the development of cognitive brain activity however, I would not adopt them but I would definitely feel guilty for not being able to do so.

If there is a woman who is about to kill her newborn triplets due to limited financial resources, I don't know if I can adopt them, but I certainly would try any means possible to stop her from murdering her kids. I would consider abortion after the development of cognitive brain activity to be a very similar situation to this.

Aerissa_Jade · Answer

I wonder if the multi year waiting list to adopt newborns would shrink if abortion becomes illegal. People seem to be getting more and more sterile and can't have kids of their own and the only real option seems to be to adopt newborns from other countries.

Nobody wants to adopt screwed up, F'd up kids that someone messed up they finally gave them to the state or had them taken away, nor should they be required to.

Your question involves newborns so I'll stick with that.

I also think Roe Vs. Wade for men should happen too, no one should have to raise a child they do not want and child support and custody laws are forcing men into it as well.

I'm do not really fit into either side, cause I would never have an abortion (didn't when I got pregnant from the rape) but I think morning after pill is not actually abortion like fanatics do.

In theory if everyone had a pill bottle full of morning after pills, abortion wouldn't hardly need to even exist.

If I couldn't have kids I'd adopt them, but the 2 to 3 year waiting list, of people would beat me to it.

They also need to find ways to make adoption way cheaper.

demonics · Answer

Is this an immaculate conception thing orr? The obsession with circumventing the womans role i. e.:

in all of this just blows my mind. Wheres the father? Where's the marriage? Did anyone open their fcking mouth about the consequences of P in V in this relationship BEFORE P in V occurred? With so much degenerate BS shoved into sex ed now, I wouldn't be surprised if they left out the actual important parts. You guys aren't arguing with real people here. You're yelling at brick walls fabricated by your televisions. My God its like none of you actually know any pro-life people! Its not logically inconsistent to demand someone DEAL with the consequences of their actions. CAUSE and EFFECT. Sex = Baby (potentially). And killing an innocent party is not ethical. Can we think of any other situation where murder of an innocent person is an acceptable alternative to y'know dealing with your sht? "If I can't murder my baby then YOU take care of it!" What kid of fck sht reasoning is that?

I know one damned thing, if men could opt out of paying child support, the same way women could opt out of being mothers, abortions would fall through the damned floor. This conversation wouldn't even exist! "Breaking news! With no incentive to have children out of wedlock, women suddenly discover the physiological maneuver called adduction!"

https://www.youtube.com/embed/-FC1IRiJ9x0

CandiceK · Answer

I can't afford to raise those three babies, so I guess they should be killed. I am surprised why you didn't add an option where people other than myself could adopt them. Lots of people would adopt them, and be able to afford it. Your argument against being pro life would be better if you had considered that.

I was pro life, but now I've changed my mind. I realized I'd rather be dead than to have a mom that didn't want me.
However, I wish there was a way for the mothers to kill their own babies, rather than have doctors have to wonder if what they're doing is right, and being able to sleep at night. I just heard that they sell abortion pills online. Maybe mothers should just order those, and let this debate rest in peace.

DizzyDesii · Answer

I’d absolutely adopt all 3 but she needs to sign off that she's not looking to be in their life. Adoption is the lesser evil in comparison to abortion. Thankfully she didn't kill them but she's still giving up what she claims she doesn't want. So i dont want her popping back up in their lives unless they’re 18

Oigit · Answer

I'm option D. Because it raises some questions. What protection was she using? Did the guy she was with use a condom as well? Was the father someone she knew and where both of them actively trying to start a family? Can I track the guy down and ask him some questions?

There are more questions that I could ask. But the entire point is that there are questions that can be asked. Both sides of the debate seem to be almost afraid to ask questions or look down on those that do. So it kind of makes me wonder are people on both sides unwilling to ask questions or answer questions due to the answers they get or their own answers changing their view?

BCA6010 · Answer

I'd adopt.

Also there is an absurdly long waiting time average for adopting newborns, somewhere in the ballpark of 25 to 30 couples for every 1 baby (in the US anyway). The "stuck in foster care" argument doesn't really apply in regards to abortion alternatives, and this hypothetical mother doesn't sound like a realistic person- if she was willing to carry the babies through pregnancy at all, then she would have looked into the foster care option and made that discovery herself.

Also, if she knows she's carrying triplets, then she is almost certainly 12+ weeks pregnant, usually 16-25 weeks is more typical. If this woman was seriously going to abort, she would've already done it by then, and while I don't believe that there is a good argument for abortions period, there certainly isn't a good argument for waiting that long to do something.

Daniela1982 · Answer

Seems to me you would go the other way and mind your own business. It is not your responsibility to raise some other person's kids. It is not on you if she gets an abortion. It is on her and the daddy. I mean what is a guy going to do, raise every woman's kids who gets pregnant and doesn't want them? At least she should do the kind thing and just leave them at a fire station and give them a chance at life.

hahahmm · Answer

I'd hand her a brochure from the local orphanage. You know, those places where your kid are raised by others. It's not like the concept of a different person raising your kids hasn't existed for eons. If the neighbor says, 'no' or has other excuses then she just proved that she's a con artist trying to con me into doing something that she hopes to benefit from later on in some way.

You see, just because you made dumb decisions doesn't mean I have to fix it for you. There's other people in the business of fixing other people's dumb choices tho.

Massageman · Answer

C.
We routinely help two Pregnancy Support centers, and at one point, I was a volunteer staffer at the weekly meetings of one of them. (Males were very limited as to what we could do- I was, essentially, a record-keeper). Doing Massage Therapy on them was not going to happen (per the centers' choice). My wife could do more - she's a she plus a Counselor.

Chiarac2003 · Answer

Of course I would …. I would applaud her for her choice.

Ghostluck · Answer

Why is the answer to put somebody's bad choices on to somebody else? I don't understand the logic. So wait, a pro-lifer's question to me is, "If I make bad choices and get knocked up, would you rather me abort or you suffer the consequences of my actions?' How about, you give them up for adoption to parents who want children but can't have children. Not, put them on me just because I am pro-life. That's not a logical question. That question is from the mindset of somebody who would rather abandon their responsibility by killing an unborn child and then hiding behind, "My body, my choice" in order to do so.

I make my mistakes, I like with the consequences. I don't put my consequences on to everyone else. That question is not a fair question at all. That would be like me saying, "If you are against the death penalty, and I murder somebody, would you rather go sit in the electric chair for me, or let them kill me?"

Same logic, different level.

PinkMichae · Answer

I would rather help her find a good family that is financially able to adopt her triplets and give them a great life. Then I'd help her understand her options of birth control she can choose to help her not get pregnant again when she isn't ready.

SusanColleen · Answer

This is a ridiculous question. I must adopt the children or the children are killed?
62 million abortions in America over 49 years. Perhaps we aborted the child who was to grow up and invent a cure for cancer. If you don’t want to be a mother, take EVERY precaution so you don’t become pregnant in the first place, nothing is more heinous than killing your own child

Reaper1985 · Answer

Daniel Tosh once compared pet adoption which uses multiple types of ads to get the word out. verse child adoption which does almost no advertising to get the word out. yet requires far more hoops for the average couple to jump though just to adopt children.

JoyGirl · Answer

I can’t adopt any children, rn. I am barely surviving…LMAOOOI I think the woman should give her triplets to a good couple that can not have children. It will give them joy. 😊

saintsRow3 · Answer

I would wanna see The Look on her Face when the baby is Aborted. Curious 🧐 whether she’d cry or not. If she cried I’d probably Tell her to Shut up that she wanted the abortion in the first place. And if she said no I didn’t I would say if you didn’t wanna Abort then you would of never Had an Abortion.

Shamalien · Answer

I’d be willing to make a monthly donation to someone who would want to raise em and we as a community can crowdfund it.

Berethor · Answer

I'm not pro-life and I don't want to raise other peoples children.

If you are Pro-Life, would you rather adopt a pregnant mother's triplets, or would you rather see her get an abortion?

Most Helpful Opinions

Most Helpful Opinions

What Girls & Guys Said