Who let them have kids anyway?

[toknowservelove]

Hey, I’m wondering how to respond to people who have an attitude that some people shouldn’t be parents. The kind who think you should have to go to court to prove you’re capable.

To give the back story, a friend on FB posted a story about a mother who murdered her child. Then there’s the comment of “Why is just anyone allowed to be a parent? Why is it that some people, who would be good parents, are not allowed to be?” I’ve sort of lost touch with this person, but I think she faces some issues of infertility. I hear her heart crying out, but the attitude really irks me.

I realize this may not be the time to start a logical argument on why we shouldn’t form committees on who gets to have kids and who doesn’t.

Another friend posted on how she adopted and had to give her life story. In essence saying, “To adopt I had to prove I was fit, but any old bozo can go have sex and wah-lah! instant parent, good or bad.”

What might be a good response to get them thinking a little more pro-life, pro-love?

 

[VeritasLuxMea]

Hey, I’m wondering how to respond to people who have an attitude that some people shouldn’t be parents. The kind who think you should have to go to court to prove you’re capable.

To give the back story, a friend on FB posted a story about a mother who murdered her child. Then there’s the comment of “Why is just anyone allowed to be a parent? Why is it that some people, who would be good parents, are not allowed to be?” I’ve sort of lost touch with this person, but I think she faces some issues of infertility. I hear her heart crying out, but the attitude really irks me.

I realize this may not be the time to start a logical argument on why we shouldn’t form committees on who gets to have kids and who doesn’t.

Another friend posted on how she adopted and had to give her life story. In essence saying, “To adopt I had to prove I was fit, but any old bozo can go have sex and wah-lah! instant parent, good or bad.”

What might be a good response to get them thinking a little more pro-life, pro-love?

Oh boy. I feel like every response I post lately could get interpreted wrongly but I can’t help but say…

Person 1: First, showed moral outrage to a mother murdering her child. Second, expressed that she wished she could be a mother.

Person 2: Expressed concerned that people have children but do not take their responsibility to those children seriously.

Just my opinion, but I think it depends on how you look at it. In my opinion, both of those people are expressing VERY pro-life, pro-love statements.

Now I understand and agree with your concerns about this whole concept of “parental licenses” and how fascist and insulting that idea sounds, but consider those two statements through my eyes and see if you feel they are as anti-life, anti-love as you thought they were.

Sometimes we are too close to a situation to evaluate it objectively, and I think that may be the case here. Nothing wrong with you, just a matter of perspective… but I think both of their hearts sound like they are in the right place.

 

[Iron_Donkey]

I doubt these two people really thought the darker parts of their sentiments through and were probably, as you said, just expressing annoyance and/or frustration at first the person’s difficulty having children and second at having to go through a process that second person (though not the agencies) knew was unnecessary.

I’m not sure that this is likely to foster pro-life sentiment, but If I were to give a “logical argument,” it’d go like this:

For the adoption case: the people who were originally caring for the child (orphanage, adoption agency or what have you) accepted a responsibility for that child. When someone adopts the child, that person is taking over the responsibility. But the agency still has primary responsibility for the child until the process is complete, and to release the child to parents that will obviously be abusive or negligent would be a failure of that responsibility, (and to release a child to such parents when it was not obvious, but when a reasonable amount of examination would have made it so would be negligence on the part of the agency and so a different failure). This requires the agency to make some sort of judgement on the prospective parents.

It could of course be that any given set of rules is too restrictive (or not restrictive enough) of who can adopt, but it is clear that there must be rules of some sort.

But the reason why there are a set of rules and why judgements must be made at all is because the agency has a responsibility for the children in its care. As a general rule, we only make such judgements when we are forced to - there must be some reason for us to decide this. Without such a cause, it’s really not our place to say who is and is not fit to parent. The fact that we have to occasionally is rather unfortunate.

The responsibility we have for other people’s children does exist, but is much smaller than the primary guardian’s, and only forces us to make the judgements which we should ideally never be making when the primary guardian (whether it be an abusive parent or negligent orphanage) does something grossly bad (that is, not merely something we don’t like, but which is most definitely unacceptable at a high level). In this case, it may be our unfortunate responsibility (typically through our government) to remove the child from their guardian for the child’s protection. But unless so prompted, we have neither the right nor the authority to say whether a person is fit to parent.

 

[mathematoons]

My answer to the title question: “It was God. Who do you think you are to question His will?”

 

[Jesus_123]

+Only God is **OMNISCIENT **(all knowing) . . . He’s in charge of this world of fallen sinful mankind . . . and since the fall of man into sin and death through the original sin of Adam and Eve . . . the holy plan of salvation for mankind has been progressing through finite time . . . life continues here on earth for the salvation of sinful fallen souls . . . God is Sovreign . . . below is a revealing portrait of life here on God’s green earth . . . as this time of the salvation of the sinful fallen souls of man continues on . . .

. . . :coffeeread: . . .
THE HOLY :bible1: BIBLE
****Ecclesiastes 1-8

1 To every thing there is a season, **and a time **to every purpose under the heaven:
2 A time to be born, and a time to die; a time to plant, and a time to pluck up that which is planted;
3 A time to kill, and a time to heal; a time to break down, and a time to build up;
4 A time to weep, and a time to laugh; a time to mourn, and a time to dance;
5 A time to cast away stones, and a time to gather stones together; a time to embrace, and a time to refrain from embracing;
6 A time to get, and a time to lose; a time to keep, and a time to cast away;
7 A time to rend, and a time to sew; a time to keep silence, and a time to speak;
8 A time to love, and a time to hate; a time of war, and a time of peace.​

In the case of adoptive parents . . . God has allowed the placement of these particular children to be entrusted into the hands of man . . . and we are not omniscient (all knowing) . . . understanding this . . . it’s a . . . wonderful thing . . . when mankind takes great care and gives serious consideration to finding a healthy wholesome family and home . . . in the seeking of a good home for precious children . . . every now and again we hear of families who become convinced that it was God himself that planned and chose their particular adoptive child to become their very own . . .

. . . all for Jesus+
. . . thank You Blessed Lord our Saviour and Redeemer+
. . . thank You Gracious Heavenly Father+
. . . thank You Sweet Spirit of our Holy God+
. . . thank you Blessed Virgin Mary our Mother+
. . . thank you Blessed Holy Mother Church+
. . . Our God Reigns!+​

 

[toknowservelove]

Thank you for your responses. I agree that both commentors had their hearts in the right place and desire the best for all children.

However, I think there is an underlying assumption many people have when they make comments like this and I hear similar comments, usually from people who work directly with children/families, such as teachers, lawyers, social workers, and health care workers. The assumption is that only certain people should have children, and those who should not are usually poor or lack higher education.

I think this is a dangerous assumption, and I also think many people are not always aware they have it. I won’t say it’s anti-life or anti-love, but it isn’t pro-life/ pro-love either. It’s like a remnant of eugenics that has snuck into our thinking, even to people who have never heard of eugenics.