The delusional leftists arguing that adoption is more “traumatic” than abortion aren’t making a convincing argument for their brutal baby death cult, but they are making a great point against the rise of surrogacy as a means for clients such as gay and “transgender” males to achieve their personal parenting fantasies.
Just look at some of the arguments that Elizabeth Spiers, who was adopted as an infant, advanced in a 2021 New York Times essay about “the trauma [adoption] can inflict” and why abortion is a better solution all around. (She’s not the only one pushing the talking point, either.)
“While pregnant, [mothers] will undergo the bonding with a child that happens by biological design as an embryo develops into a living, breathing, conscious human,” Spiers wrote. “And then that child will be taken away.”
In an abortion, the child — who is a living human from the beginning of pregnancy, and is taking practice breaths by 10 weeks and developing “brain connections that stimulate memory, decision-making, [and] emotions” by 15 weeks — is also “taken away” from his mother. It’s just that, instead of having the chance to grow up in a loving family, the child’s lifeless body is discarded into a bucket of medical waste.
Mothers experience natural physical and emotional bonding with their unborn children, and abortion doesn’t erase that. It’s one of the reasons many women experience abortion regret.
Spiers continues: “Adoption is often just as traumatic as the right thinks abortion is, if not
