Texas has some of the strictest abortion laws, with 6000 kids up for adoption, and almost 30,000 in the foster care system. I wonder how many of the people who pushed for such strict abortion laws are licensed to foster? Or tried to adopt? Or at the very least, donated time/money to helping kids get adopted?
I recognize that it’s a bad thing that those 36,000 kids don’t have good situations with stable, loving families. The community and government ought to do a better job taking care of them.
But I cannot reconcile that it would be a better result if those 36,000 kids were dead.- I think it’s good they’re alive, even if their circumstances may be unimaginably rough right now.
I often push back on pro-choice folks by saying "would you rather be alive in foster care or to never have existed?" and it usually leads to a pretty good conversation. One that I especially like because I get to mention Neutral Milk Hotel lyrics. Point being I understand, and truly empathize with, the logic.
To be clear, my stance is that only women should vote on the issue of abortion. I also recognize that that wouldn't be possible outside of a Utopian society.
But, back in the day, when I was pro-life, my ex and I did the work to become foster parents. And through the fostering system, we also signed up to adopt. And I can't imagine explaining to 25 year old Stevesie that there are people who are adamantly pro-life that aren't signed up to foster/adopt.
So my point is not that those 36,000 shouldn't exist. My point is that even at the ripe age of 25, we signed up to foster/adopt any kid who needed it. And even though I voted democrat almost exclusively since the age of 18, I think it's more "pro-life" to offer respite to children in the foster care system, while voting "pro-choice", than it is to vote "pro-life" and not offer a home to children in the foster care system.
So that's why I look at those Texas numbers and have to wonder how people interpret "pro-life". Because holy eff, that's a lot of kids looking for homes.
