What's wrong with putting unwanted children up for adoption instead of aborting them?

What's wrong with putting unwanted children up for adoption instead of aborting them?
This new craze of aborting children came out recently and it seems to be pushed so hard that practically everyone forgot about putting children up for adoption.
If you put kids up for adoption it stops the pro lifers from calling you a murderer and it lets you not become a single parent.

So I'm wondering is why is this option not talked about much anymore and why is abortion pushed so much as the final go to option for people?

Other urls found in this thread:

nber.org/papers/w8004
twitter.com/AnonBabble

Who would adopt a mongoloid ? What should they do with kids nobody wants ? Put them down like stray dogs ?

It's cheaper to kill them in the womb, christcuck. There's nothing virtuous about pawning off you problems on other people.

I don't know shit about this, but something tells me the PC police thinks abortion is OK but adopting your children away is literally-hitler-levels of evil. Am i correct?

Well it would be good for people who cannot have children of their very own so instead of going to other countries looking for their children they can get one at their local orphanage.
If no one wants them than when they're 18 they can go working for themselves. That's what usually happens.
Cheaper for who? The parent can drop the kid off at the orphanage for free, the only ones who are usually paying for it is the orphanage, which is their jobs.

At least the kid has a life instead of being put down.

Pretty much this. It also creates an unneeded societal financial burden.

That's the thing, I haven't heard any SJWS opinions on the whole adoption thing.
I'm just waiting around here hoping for someone to throw an argument that SJW would usually use.

Societies which legalize all abortions are already paying a financial burden keeping those clinics open, this would just get rid of the clinics in way for orphanages with a slight increase in cost.

Okay, several things here:

First is that 'orphanages' aren't really a thing anymore except in obscure third world countries. Second is that spending the state spending ~$700 per abortion is way, *WAY* cheaper than even one year on the foster care system's, tax-payer funded dime. Third is why in the holy hell would I want future leftist voters to exist?

It removes incentive for the government to strengthen their immigration laws due to the increase of population. Which means less immigrants.

The kids at the orphanage could be allowed to work/fundraising at an early age to help maintain the costs of the orphanage.

It gives incentive*

Leftist governments will push immigration no matter what the birth rate is. That's a moot point. The "labor shortage" thing is just a meme and they're just trying to flood the labor market.

Again, orphanages aren't a thing in first world countries. We have overburdened foster care systems spending $10-20k+ annually per kid including all administrative costs.

>Leftist governments will push immigration
Globalists would of course, but if your country is nationalistic they wouldn't.

Well if the costs are so bad than if you just shorten the budget of other government projects like welfare, public spending etc. While allowing children from orphanages to work and fundraise at an early age I bet you can successfully maintain the program.

>Globalists would of course, but if your country is nationalistic they wouldn't.

Even then, they still would. They're relocating Calais migrants in small towns and villages all over France. Nobody wants them, the locals are protesting everywhere but every time they do, pro-immigration activist will travel there from all over to counter-protest them with bigger numbers.

There is a perverse and corrupt to reward NGOs and local authorities backed by Government and Medias to house migrants, it has become a taxpayer funded industry.

In Cognac there was 35 well funded organizations involved in relocating 15 migrants and the locals don't get their say about it. It's insane.

You have very paradoxical logic. So you think by removing abortion so a bunch of future globalist leftists will live will somehow ensure that your country is nationalistic and won't push for immigration. Then you go on to suggest that orphanages which don't exist will be able to raise upwards of $20,000 every year per child on a system which is getting ever more bloated because of no abortions? Yet, moreover you suggest that child labor would be able to command something even vaguely close to $20k in annual wages?

Good god, I would hate to live in the dystopia you've just cooked up.

To be fair, your government is socialist and is a part of the EU, so having pro immigration isn't a surprise.
>So you think by removing abortion so a bunch of future globalist leftists
That really depends on who's the administrators of the orphanages, if they are globalists they would push globalists ideals down upon the children, if they're nationalists than they would push their views upon the children. Like a parent would to their child.

>moreover you suggest that child labor would be able to command something even vaguely close to $20k in annual wages?
The only part I suggested was that the use of child labour "helps" not completely pays for the life of a child. I believe the use of government funding, help from third party donations would keep the orphanages up and running, child labour and fundraising is just suppose to help it out, not completely cover the costs.

>unwanted children


Those unwanted children are usually niggers. No one wants to adopt them.

There is no problem adopting white children – everyone wants them.

You keep going back to orphanages. They don't exist. The west has foster care systems.

You're plugging you ears to the costs which are exponential and are you really going to sit there and postulate like you have some moral compass about abortion when you're advocating child labor? Really?

There's no helping you; I can tell you're just looking for affirmation of your faux morality.

>mfw I was my mom's first kid after she found out my dad is constantly cheating on her.
>decides not to abort me because she's a Jesus freak
>my life sucks and tell her I wish she had aborted me
I am legitimately envious of aborted babies

Abortion is a necessity evil; it reduces the burden on the taxpayer, on victims of crime, and leads to fewer Liberal voters.

The average woman in America getting an abortion is already a single mother, on some form of public assistance (food stamps, section 8, welfare), PoC, and live in high crime inner city ghettos. Minorities make up about 70% of abortions.

These are people that shouldn't have kids to begin with. If they pop out another kid, we're forced to pay for the kid (medical, education, social welfare). They're a net drain on society. They are also prone to criminality, Roe v. Wade has reduced crime because of these facts.

The sooner Cuckservatives realize this the better.

No, you got me all wrong here, there is still orphanages around my area.
I'm speaking hypothetically if there was still a few orphanages in each state/ country and how you could maintain them instead of resorting to abortion.

Foster care is a pretty good alternative to orphanages because they give the children some belonging, however in the case that the children are birthed into the world in bulk I doubt there would be enough foster parents to handle the situation, which brings us back to orphanages.

Crime was extremely low before Roe v. Wade

Get /fit/ mate.
All you need to do is improve yourself, things only get better for you as long as you try to improve you.

There's a huge waiting list for babies, they would go straight to a family. The kids who wind up in foster care and group homes are the older kids who were probably removed from their parents and have behavioral issues from a shitty upbringing

"Crime began to fall roughly 18 years after abortion legalization. The 5 states that allowed abortion in 1970 experienced declines earlier than the rest of the nation, which legalized in 1973 with Roe v. Wade. States with high abortion rates in the 1970s and 1980s experienced greater crime reductions in the 1990s."

nber.org/papers/w8004

Bottom line, it started reducing crime once the aborted kids would have been in their teens/young adult years. So you're looking at it having an effect starting around the early/mid 90s.