Adoption is the Option
Commentary by Sanford D. HornFebruary 25, 2014
A recent column in The
Indianapolis Star written by Sandy Sasso, rabbi emerita of Congregation Beth-El
Zedeck in Indianapolis, calls to “Fight poverty, promote sex ed to reduce
abortions.”
Nowhere in her liberal diatribe calling for less
government intrusion in people’s bedrooms, but then hypocritically demanding
government funding for abortion and birth control, did the good rabbi ever
mention the word ADOPTION. Nowhere – not once in her entire screed.
The one aspect of Sasso’s column with which I agree is
her pronouncement that “we all want to reduce the number of abortions.” How we
get there is a different story.
Yet, another one of her assertions, that “The most
important fact is that no one is ‘pro-abortion,’” is both naïve and
disingenuous. Sasso’s statement is not a “fact” as she avers; it’s barely
wishful thinking. Planned Parenthood, an abortion mill advocating for abortion,
makes its money performing abortions. They would not remain in business were it
not for the thousands upon thousands of abortions it commits year in and year
out, raking in millions and millions of dollars on the deaths of the unborn for
whom there is no one to speak up when the woman or worse yet, girl, in the
examination room is told that it is alright to slaughter her own flesh and
blood.
Fighting poverty is a great idea suggested by Sasso, but
poverty is not the reason young women having abortions are pregnant in the
first place. The reason is a poor education starting at home – a home that
ideally should have a mother and a father.
The generations of teen and out of wedlock pregnancies
are more often the result of a lack of education, but this is a generational,
systemic crisis that sex education in the schools has not cured. Nor has the inculcation
of condoms in the schools diminished the pregnancy/abortion crisis.
Sex education must start with the simple fact that
condoms, the pill, a diaphragm, or any other forms of birth control are not 100
percent effective. The only foolproof manner of avoiding pregnancy is the abstinence
of the behavior that would result in pregnancy – sexual intercourse. Offering
condoms in schools send the absolute wrong message – that such an offer is a
tacit approval of the behavior requiring the condom in the first place.
Then there is the issue of who is paying for those
condoms in the schools. If condoms are in public schools, they are being
financed by the people – the taxpayers, as tax dollars are used to fund that
enterprise.
This is yet another area where Sasso is wrong. She writes
“The opponents of reproductive rights have found a new argument to promote
their cause: fiscal conservatism.” Sasso is wrong on two counts. Conservatives do
not oppose reproductive rights. Conservatives oppose reproductive wrongs. It is
wrong to slaughter an innocent baby in the womb – as Jewish and Catholic
beliefs support life beginning at conception. It is wrong for that conceived
baby not to have a voice while a Planned Parenthood agent is encouraging such a
slaughter. It is wrong for abortion to be used as a form of birth control.
Here is where adoption comes into play. Adoption – once again,
a word and concept never presented by Sasso in her editorial. There are
thousands of American married couples desiring children, who, for one reason or
another have not been blessed by G-d with conception. These couples can and
will provide the unwanted child with a home and most importantly, a life – a safe
harbor from the abortionists butcher knife. American babies being adopted by
American couples – that should be the goal.
Sasso is also wrong to say fiscal conservatism is a new
argument against abortion. This has been a long-standing battle between conservatives
and liberals. Sasso plunges way into the deep end when she wrote conservatives “want
to ensure that the federal government pays neither for abortions nor
contraception, regardless of the fact that these are constitutionally protected
rights.” Sasso does not seem to understand the definition of the word fact. She
has twice used it to suggest something she believes is true when in FACT it is
not.
Yes, it is a fact that conservatives, and many
independents and moderates, for that matter, object to any taxpayer dollars
funding abortions and contraceptives. It is not a fact, however, that a federally
funded abortion or contraceptive is a constitutional right. The landmark 1973
Supreme Court case Roe v. Wade
granted rights of privacy, but did not mention either abortion or
contraceptives. And the growing sentiment coming from the vox populi is to call for the overturning of Roe in a march to the Supreme Court each January.
Using Sasso’s faulty logic though, according to the
Second Amendment to the United States Constitution, we the people have the
right to bear arms. Should the federal government then provide the general
public with those guns?
Sasso then suggests that no one is calling for the secession
of federal funding for Viagara. Think again, rabbi. The federal government
should no more be funding Viagara than it should abortions or birth control. It
shouldn’t be in the baby business at all – including adoption – that should be
the work of synagogues, churches, and various other legitimate religious
organizations.
Abortion can be reduced with honest sex education
extolling the virtues of abstinence as a surefire way to avoid pregnancy.
Abortion can be reduced with honest sex education offered with guest speakers
telling of the true life horrors of what happens to the fetus during the
abortion procedure. Abortion can be reduced with honest sex education offered
by women who underwent the deleterious procedure and how they regretted it.
Abortion can be reduced by encouraging adoption and reminding those considering
abortion that there are loving couples who desire nothing more than to raise,
nurture, and love a child, yet are unable to produce one on their own.
That Rabbi Sasso never once mentioned adoption in her
editorial raises more questions than it answers. Does she support abortion more
than adoption? It creates a cacophony between her profession and the issue at
hand. Sasso never mentioned that abortion has killed more blacks than the Ku
Klux Klan. Sasso, a rabbi, never decried abortion in the Jewish community as a
second Holocaust either.
Abortion is not our portion. Adoption is the option.
Sanford D. Horn is
a writer and educator living is Westfield, IN. He is an active member of
Congregation Shaarey Tefilla in Carmel, IN.
Great words! Adoption is a selfless, live giving option that should be honored and celebrated. Especially if abortion proponents claim they want to reduce abortions. Unfortunately, they usually just SAY that and obviously don't mean it. Abortion is a multi-billion dollar business and adoption would cut into the planned parenthood profit margins. Praying more people are willing to open their eyes to the truth and start supporting life and love by promoting and honoring adoption :-)
ReplyDelete