Disclaimer #1: If you don’t have a biblical worldview, you will disagree with everything I am about to post. Therefore, since we start at different points of view, arguing is pointless. (said worldview being this: sex is for marriage. period. end of discussion.)
Disclaimer #2: I think there does need to be reform in the adoption industry. However, I think education is key and the majority of people who are against adoption (not against adoption reform – against adoption) fail to acknowledge that.
Disclaimer #3: If you are still struggling with infertility and still hate that you can’t get pregnant, you might get angry (again) reading this post. (because it’s not fair…)
Disclaimer #4: I’m not talking about foster care or married families that are in horrible situations. I am talking about unmarried women, no matter their age.
Okay….so this post has been floating around in my head since last week. I am tired of people not realizing that at the root of the need for infant adoption in this country is the glamorization of sex.
There. I said it.
In other words, if we didn’t, as a society, glamorize sex so that even 11 & 12 year old children were having sex, the need for adoption (especially infant adoption) would be greatly reduced.
We teach our children there are consequences to their actions:
…you touch a hot stove, you get burned
…you don’t look before crossing the street, you get smushed by a car
…you get into the car of a stranger, you get hurt or dead
…you eat the little berries on the bush out front and you get sick
Why don’t we teach them that you have sex, you get babies?
You can study the history of sex in the United States and see the correllation between the rise of unprotected premarital sex and the rise of the adoption industry.
What if we just taught and reinforced that sex = babies?
“Wait! What?” I hear people gasping. “Tell people that they should wait until they are married to have sex? Tell children that sex is for grown ups who are married? Tell people that sex isn’t a right but a privilege of marriage? Stop watching crap on television? Stop letting my child do whatever they want?”
If we returned to even a moral society, let alone a biblical one, there would be fewer babies born to women who don’t realize babies are a side effect of sex!!!!!
Our society is completely hedonistic. Our society says to do whatever you want…whatever feels good…don’t worry about later, focus on what you are feeling now. We teach our children that, too, by a lack of teaching them otherwise. We give children whatever they want whenever they want and we let them watch whatever they want on TV (especially if we put a TV in their bedroom and assume they go to sleep at night…ha ha ha). Do we sit down and explain to them that although everyone who wants to has sex on television and in the movies and no one ever gets pregnant or has an STD, that if they do they same thing they will most likely get an STD or pregnant?
No. Parents don’t. Trust me. I taught middle school for seven years.
And when the feminist movement came into full force, women were encouraged to be like men and just sleep with whoever they wanted.
The problem with that is women are the ones who get pregnant while the men get another notch on their bedpost.
And we don’t tell the young women this.
So I don’t get the disconnect in people’s thinking:
A) Women – and girls, as young as they want – should have sex whenever they want with whoever they want
B) We’ll neglect to mention that the teenage & early twenty years are prime fertility years and that no birth control is 100% effective. Oh,and we’ll emphasize that abstinence is a stupid and unrealistic idea and that even though it is 100% effective at preventing STDs and pregnancy, no one could possibly have enough self-control to actually remain abstinent until marraige (even though millions of people do).
C) We’ll tell women (oh, and the underage girls, let’s not forget them) that if they do get pregnant they can rip the unborn child from their womb, without mention of long-term post-abortion side effects. Oh, and we’ll make sure they know they aren’t bad for doing this.
D) But if they decide they want to complete the pregnancy and make an adoption plan, we’ll vilify them, the people that help them, and the families that are prepared to parent.
I don’t get it.
If you want to stop infant adoption, why not start with education? Why not start with abstinence education? That’s the only way to guarantee that women don’t become pregnant with children they don’t really want or aren’t ready to parent or are shocked to realize are there!
What makes us think that a 12 year old is ready to be a mother?
The fact that said 12 year old thinks she’s ready to have sex?
Who told her she was ready to have sex? Do you know how many 12 year old girls realize that if they have sex they could get pregnant? Very very few.
Do you know how many unwed women find themselves pregnant and are surprised? Why are they surprised? Because society has indoctrinated them into believing “it won’t happen to them.”
Why don’t we start with education? Where is the outcry to teach women that sex = babies?
Why don’t we start by teaching people the Truth? That sex is sacred. And for strengthening marriage. And for the creation of children, among other things.
It is not a game. It is not a hobby. It is not a right. It is not a way to grow closer to your date.
It’s sacred. And beautiful. And designed for the purpose of making babies. And causing a couple to become one. Nowhere on this planet do you come closer to understanding the Trinity than making love to your spouse – the two become one. It helps you understand the closeness in the relationship between God the Father, God the Son and God the Holy Spirit.
Why don’t I ever hear people talk about that?
17 thoughts on “The Disconnect – Updated”
Rachel, so far I have agreed with most of your posts because they feel like you are reading my mind. This one, feels a little different. Perhaps because I do not belong to a biblical worldview? In any case, I think you should add another disclaimer that you are only talking about a subsect of expectant moms. Not every woman placing her child is a teenager or unmarried. Just saying. 🙂
In general I agree with the need for education. Having been through the adoption process and now being on the other side, I see so many problems with the whole adoption industry. I am not even sure where I should make a start. I tell myself, I should be the change I want to see. Short of undoing our adoption and ensuring the first mom of my children has the resources and support to parent the children, there is nothing I can do that feels right.
What I do think is each PAP and first family should do is to make sure they set aside their prejudices and beliefs and come together for the cause of the child. Keep communication lines open. Be empathetic. Be supportive of the need to search and connect with one's roots.
The past few months have been a huge awakening for me. I wish I knew then what I know now.
Amen, Rachel. 🙂
I know where you're coming from, but I have to agree with Prabha. Not every woman placing her child for adoption is an unmarried teenager. I'm also just saying… ;o)
I agree with you that there's the need for educating children about the consequences of having sex, and also educating their parents on how to educate their children, but I don't think it's as simple as telling them sex is just for making babies. (Also, just saying…)
I just keep hearing a voice on my mind that says I can't have sex! If sex is for the sole purpose of making babies then my husband and I should stop right away because we CAN'T make babies… :o|
I'm only speaking about unmarried women, whether teenage or not. Our son's birthmother was far from a teenager.
Maru – you can have sex. That's why I posted about the infertility. I guess I should have said one of the purposes of sex…nevermind. I'm going to update my post!!
So your belief is that unmarried women do not deserve to parent their own children.
My adoptive mother is a devout Christian but she does not feel this way.
And if this is about having a *biblical view* then I suppose you do not eat pork either or shellfish. And you hide yourself away during menstruation too, right?
This kind of thinking, this kind of post is your right but I personally find it offensive.
You missed my point entirely.
I don't believe umarried women “deserve” to have sex. If they get pregnant, they absolutely have the right to keep their babies. But if they don't want to, they shouldn't be vilified, either.
And why do people always go for the Old Testament laws that Jesus himself overturned? People need to read the ENTIRE Bible and not pick and choose.
The theology of sex throughout the whole Bible is that unmarried women AND men should not be having sex. It starts in the Old Testament and continues into the New.
The food laws & cleanliness laws were overturned during the New Testament when Jesus said it's not what goes into your mouth that makes you clean, but what comes out of it (and your heart). And the menstruation law was to avoid the spread of germs – something science took care of.
I admit, I was very hurt by this post. I found it extremely judgmental.
It seems to walk the line of calling illegitimate children bad names and considering, I began my life as a child born to an unmarried person, I found this offensive.
Perhaps I misunderstood the intent of the post.
My own children are still quite young and because of my reunion we have already begun to talk about the reasons my own mother placed me (it comes up repeatedly from them, they seem to have a difficult time wrapping their brains around the whole thing) and the importance of waiting to have sex.
However, I know many an adoptive parent who were not virgins on their wedding day.
I also know from living through my adoptive parents nasty divorce that marriage is not always a factor for long term stability for a child.
My own first mother was very upset to learn that my parents had divorced in an ugly way during my teenage years. She thought I was getting a better life. A life of stability.
And yes. I do bring up the Old Testament because you yourself spoke of living with a biblical view. If you are going to use one, you kind of have to use both. Its not a pick and choose kind of lifestyle, is it?
I also know that Jesus spoke a lot of loving one another. Of having compassion for one another, even when we fall. That is the way I try to live my life.
It is hard to parent well with the media throwing sex and drugs into our kids faces. That is why we do not get those channels and we monitor our kids exposure to media like hawks.
My children, even at their young ages know that sex creates babies and it is something for grownups who are committed to each other. And my children are male. I am still teaching them that they are also responsible for creating a child. In my eyes, the responsibility does not just fall with the woman, although I agree that unfortunately, the responsibility often DOES fall on women alone when a crisis pregnancy happens.
I do need to address your comments about pregnant 12 year olds. Studies have shown that many young girls who have sex at a young age have most likely been victims of sexual abuse, usually from family members. I try not to judge the pregnant 12 year-olds out there. Life is hard enough.
Maybe I grew up in a different sect of Christianity than you are used to but the Jesus I have been raised to know preached compassion, understanding and love.
I have said before, I have grown to enjoy your blog and I can see how deeply you love your son.
Honestly, I am hoping I have just misread what you have written here.
BethGo – I would love love LOVE to email you 🙂
But I can't find a way to do so through blogger….
If you wouldn't mind, could you please send me an email at firstname.lastname@example.org?
I would love to answer this comment and pick your brain on some other adoptive-parent stuff!!
Rachel, I do see what you are saying and agree with it in part: yes, the glamorization of sex in our culture contributes greatly to teen sex. And yes, sex is a beautiful, God-created act designed to occur within the bounds of marriage. On those points, we agree. : )
However, from there our opinions diverge. ; )
You say, “I am tired of people not realizing that at the root of the need for infant adoption in this country is the glamorization of sex.” But this is not accurate. Possibly more accurate would be to say that the root of sex outside of marriage is the glamorization of sex. (and even then, that is only one factor…it's more complex than that…but yes, a HUGE factor ) But see, you are then taking THAT, and tagging it on to the need for infant adoption. These are two very different things, and I believe we do women and children a grave disservics when we intertwine them.
Why does the pregnancy of an unmarried woman, even a young one, mean adoption is necessary? That really is the question, isn't it. I mean, I fully get that if fewer teens were having sex, we'd see fewer teen pregnancies. But WHAT does that have to do with adoption? What assumptions are
being made to make the leap from pregnancy to relinquishment? I ask because I don't know for what they are for you. It could be a variety of things, and I don't want to assume ;), but SOME presuppositions ARE being made. So, I guess my encouragement to you would be to look deeper into that, and try to figure out what those are.
Thanks for the opportunity to dialogue on your blog.:)
Thanks, Michelle, for your comment.
My main point is we need to stop telling people sex doesn't have consequences.
And I don't make the leap from umarried pregnant women to infant adoption. However…at least in the cases I am aware of through my own life and that of the social work agency we used…almost all of the infants placed for adoption are from unmarried women.
I'm just saying maybe if we did a better job informing women that they could have babies when they have sex, not so many women would find themselves in need of an adoption plan.
I love adoption. But I do think it needs lots of reform. But I also think that it needs a lot of education.
Pregnancy doesn't necessarily mean relinquishment. I'm not making that leap. Not at all. But sometimes it does, and then women are made to feel horrible for making that choice. So why not eliminate the need for that choice?
For all of the anti-adoption rhetoric out there, making women who choose adoption plans feel badly, I find it interesting no one starts with sex education.
If you know of such a source, where people who want to do away with adoption start by telling women and men not to have sex, point me in that direction!
Oh, and I'm not just talking about teens. I'm sorry if that is how it came across.
Across the board, less sex outside of marriage would equal less babies. Whether or not adoption plans are made, we'd have fewer chidren being raised in single-parent homes, and wouldn't that be a good thing?
I guess I'm not very articulate in my writing….hmmm…must work on that!
I have just browsed this over ( I am from the adoption blogger buddies group) and i agree so much! how i aid i just browsed it but i totally agree and having a biblical view as well sex is glamourized and…yeah but anyways you are so right! im gonna go read it closer now 🙂
I totally agree with you and while I'm reading it after you edited it I don't see what some commenters are complaining about. You clearly didn't say sex is only for making a baby or that married women are included in what you're talking about.
The place to stop it is at home. I think you said that parents should be teaching their children these things. That's the real issue today. Parents don't parent and allow the schools to do it and when the schools are handing out condoms they're not helping too much. You're right about the 12 year olds having no clue. I heard a story of a 11 or 12 year old that didn't even know she could because she never had her period but she never did because she got pregnant the very first month she was fertile. And another 11 year got pregnant so she'd have a baby to play with. That's why she wanted to. And then there's that pact of girls in high school. And all the celeb teenagers that are getting pregnant. UGH! Yes I agree with you. Very well said.
Well…I do think there's some misinformation here. It's just FAR more complex than telling people that “sex can lead to babies”. KNIM?
Parents DO teach their children this. And GOOD GIRLS have sex. BAD choice, GOOD, God-loving girls. Is it sin? Yes. But we all sin, so let's stop acting as though the punishment of losing your child somehow fits the crime of having sex out of wedlock. God offered grace, while we were yet sinners, so I cannot follow that the loss of a child to adoption because someone had a moment of indescretion is somehow justified.
And I think that's what is getting me here. It's not that we shouldn't, as a society, try to tackle the issue of teen sex. And it's not that we, as the Christian community, should not try to instill a desire for purity in our children. Those are both GOOD things. : ) But I think more to the point is, what will our reaction be if they DO stray from what we've taught? Will we show grace in that situation? Or will we condemn them to a lifetime of loss and say it is their due?
It is important for you to not be so judgmental. Young girls (and boys) are often victims of sexual assault and rape by predators. Then there are fathers who impregnate their daughters; any combination you can think of an older man or even a brother and sister, can make babies. I wrote a blog post on the youngest mother — a five year old. Such a young mother deserves compassion, not ridicule. (http://forbiddenfamily.net/2010/05/28/my-analysis-of-the-story-of-historys-youngest-mother/) So please don't exclude these situations from your mind and discussion.
The illegitimate bastar… babies that result from unmarried pregnancies carry the brunt of societal stigma. Be careful. Adoptees are insulted by these remarks.
Laws were instituted in the 1930s to cover up illegitimate births by sealing and falsifying birth certificates of these babies. The problems that stem from this type of abuse are far more damaging than you are aware of.
I know. I am a half orphan bastardized by adoption. My mother died, leaving behind five children and a husband. He was talked into relinquishing his youngest child, a newborn, to a closed adoption. A Catholic priest told my father that the baby needs two parents. So, according to the priest (who follows the Bible) none of the other older four children needed two parents, just the infant. Separating an existing sibling group further damaged our family. I was raised as an only child and resent how my adoptive parents lied to me to intentionally keep me from my own siblings: they knew, it wasn't that they didn't know who and where my father and siblings were, they knew. This was child abuse perpetrated upon five children who were born as full blood siblings.
My birth was legitimate, yet I am bound by laws meant to hide illegitimate births by sealing and then falsifying birth certificates of adoptees. Millions of other half and full orphans, step-parent adoptees and other adoptees born to married parents are stigmatized and victimized by laws created to target a certain group of people: the products of unmarried sex. These laws are outdated and perpetuate discrimination against a powerless segment of society.
It would behoove you to open your mind to the deeper consequences of the actions of people who make moralistic judgments on others. Adoptees suffer the consequences.
Also, your view does not take into consideration the millions of couples who choose not marry, have children and stay together for decades. These couples made their choices and don't have to subscribe to your moral code. These families are happy and their children (who grow up to be adults) are happy. Who are you to place judgment on how other people live? If it works for others, they are not hurting you. And, these illegitimate births are not sealed and falsified as are the births of illegitimates who are adopted.