2006-08-18 20:08:56 · 38 answers · asked by bcolton7 1 in Pregnancy & Parenting ➔ Other - Pregnancy & Parenting
no. I think keeping a child you would treat bad or be unable to provide for, or don't really want is far more immoral.
2006-08-18 20:11:34 · answer #1 · answered by jen 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Adoption is a beautiful gift that you can give someone. Abortion is murder. Adoption is life. Why should a beautiful and innocent little baby be torn apart limb to limb because it is not convenient at the time. Choose adoption and choose life. I have seen the horrific photos of aborted fetuses and it is a nightmare. There is nothing wrong with adoption. If you are unable emotionally or financially to care for a child then most certainly you can look into adoption. There are a lot of agencies who can help and there are so many wonderful infertile couples who just want a baby to complete their life. You have to be a loving person to go through the pregnancy and then be able to give up the baby because you know in your heart you are doing the right thing.
2006-08-20 08:42:45 · answer #2 · answered by LaLaLisa 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
No definately not, what is morally wrong is keeping a child and not being able to provide for him/her. Giving a child up for adoption gives potential parents a chance to have a child they could never have and give a home to the baby that is loving and caring.
2006-08-18 20:12:45 · answer #3 · answered by Madison 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋
I was adopted, at the age of two, along with my sister. I grew up knowing that i was adopted. I honestly believe that there is nothing wrong with adoption. Wether it is because you can't raise the child or because you don't want the child, or whatever reason. It does not matter why you are giving the baby up, you are giving that baby to someone who wants it and will raise it and love it. The child will be better off. There are hundreds of people who want babies and cannot have them for one reason or another.
2006-08-19 02:05:02 · answer #4 · answered by wildcat942002 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I dont know to be honest. I guess if you feel it is morally wrong then maybe for you it is. I think feelings like this are different with each person. I think there is good reasons people put children up for adoption and im sure for mos t of them it is the harderst thing in their life they will ever do. I have alot of respect for somone who feels for whatever reason they cant care for their child and puts them up for adoption for that reason to get a better life.
2006-08-18 20:17:25 · answer #5 · answered by sammy 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I don't think that it's morally wrong if you can't support the child or if it would guarantee a better life for th child. But if it is just because you don't want the child, then it is wrong. If you are mature enough to lay down and make the baby, you better be mature enough to take care of it.
2006-08-19 01:50:02 · answer #6 · answered by dolphins_chic_69 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
If you can't give the child a good life,adoption is probably the best answer. It is definately a much wiser decision than abortion, because that is not moral at all.Plus there are many families who would love children but are unable to conceive, so they are happy to adopt a child.
2006-08-18 20:16:57 · answer #7 · answered by wildleopard1212 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋
why are you putting he/she up for adoption??morally i do think that it is wrong. its one think for a 14 or 16 year old to put a child up for that but don't do it if your 24 or 25 or 30!! to me i think that is just being selfish. its just like throeing a child to another person that you don't even know. throeing them to the street. some woman say oh, I'm pregnant it was an accident. well don't have sex if you cant take care of a child. use birth control or condoms. just what ever you do don't put he/she up for adoption. your child will grow up saying that you didn't love him/her. just be responsible and take care of that child and be the best parents you possibly can. good luck
2006-08-18 20:41:29 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
No she can't place the teen for adoption. the father desires the teen and apparently because of this she did no longer abort thinking the father needed the toddler. So no she will't place the toddler for adoption. Whoever this father is first he desires to get on the states putative father resister if it has one or maybe doing surrounding states. He desires to start showing he has an interest in the teen with the aid of way of helping out with the mothers scientific expenditures, taking parenting training available at community hospitals relatively on the brink of exchange right into a father and substantial caretaker of the toddler yet to be born. This newborn does now no longer have have been given to stay with this lady she can grant up complete rights and the father will take complete custody. This gal would additionally supply the father complete custody and he or she will have say visitations. regarding her giving up her rights with the aid of and massive she would now no longer would desire to pay toddler help. besides it is going newborn can't be placed for adoption.
2016-10-02 06:49:49 · answer #9 · answered by mcclister 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
No, adoption can be a great thing, parents who are not able to support their children give them the opportunity to live a good life. It is sad that the foster care system and orphanages are sometimes not the best place for children but when the children get into a permanent family situation, nothing could be better.
2006-08-18 20:31:13 · answer #10 · answered by ERIC W 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
No. More 16 year olds need to put their babies up for adoption. I know it sounds mean, but most 16 year olds are not ready for the responsibility of raising a child.
2006-08-19 04:17:11 · answer #11 · answered by ? 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋