Click here to view CMI's position on climate change.

Feedback archiveFeedback 2019

Murdering babies because they’re expensive is wrong

Published: 28 September 2019 (GMT+10)

Mr. F.K. wrote a letter to the CMI-US office, saying:


I have an idea that would stop abortion. It costs $230,000 to raise a child in the U.S. Maybe you anti-abortion folks could donate the money to help poor women bring up these unwanted children.

Are you personally willing to come up with the money to save one baby?

Yes, I thought not.

Lita Cosner, CMI-US, responds:

Thank you for writing in and giving us a chance to respond to your comment.

First, abortion is wrong because it is murdering a human being. Yes, it is expensive to bring up a child. No, that isn’t a reason for killing little boys and girls. And I don’t have to be willing to personally pay for them to say that it is wrong to kill them. Think about someone in the mid-1800s claiming that slavery is wrong. Would the slave owner be justified to argue: “But I paid a lot for my slaves! Are you willing to pay for them?” Just like I wouldn’t have to be personally willing to reimburse the slave owner to say that his owning slaves is wrong, I don’t have to be able to pay for all the children that are killed to say that it is an abomination.

Second, if the consideration is genuinely financial, there is help available. There is a long line of people waiting to adopt babies, so no baby is unwanted—and that also applies to babies who are disabled or sick. Adopting a baby entails for paying all of the costs, financial and otherwise, associated with raising that child. And if a woman chooses to parent her child, most Western countries have welfare programs. Furthermore, pro-life people are at the forefront of running pregnancy resource centers which provide women with services and connect them with resources to help them.

Third, women abort for reasons that are not usually solely financial. Maybe the woman cannot pay for the costs associated with having a child and feels unable to cope with the emotional pain of allowing another family to adopt the child. Or maybe she realizes that though she qualifies for welfare services that would make it financially possible but does not want to make the changes to her lifestyle that would be required for her to be a responsible parent. The reasons for ending a baby’s life are clearly not solely financial. And while these obviously do not apply to every situation where a woman is considering abortion, these do represent real reasons why women have abortions.

Also, even if pro-life people stepped up and offered to pay for every child—as the massive group of people waiting to adopt children continue to do—this wouldn’t be the “idea that would stop abortion” that you propose, because the pro-abortion argument isn’t that no woman should have to pay for and raise a child she doesn’t want. The argument is that a woman has the right to end the life of a child in the womb she does not want.

So even though pro-life people have no obligation to pay for the children they argue should not be murdered, many pro-life people essentially do just that. So now will you say that abortion is wrong because there is always someone willing to pay for that child’s upbringing? “I thought not.”

Helpful Resources

Is Human Life Special?
by Gary Bates and Lita Cosner
US $3.50
Soft Cover

Readers’ comments

Murray H.
Totally agree with you Lita, killing babies in the womb is wrong and creation, as recorded in Genesis, explains how we are created in the image of God.
Peter M.
It has to be obvious that no one profits from abortion. That is, there are no winners, despite the proclamations of the perpetrators of the abortion evil. I would like to add that there must be ongoing costs and consequences that women suffer following an abortion. The cost to society of ongoing mental treatment to such women who have to deal with the guilt of their actions must be quite considerable I imagine and can continue for many years unless the woman finds forgiveness in the arms of the Saviour. Who is offering to pay these ongoing costs to society amongst the pro-Abortionists?
David C.
I am not suggesting that man has the right to play God but what was carried out during the Genesis story cushions God’s right to take lives as a form of early diplomatic immunity. Change a few words and you have ‘The termination of babies during the flood was necessary to prevent grave permanent spiritual injury to the physical or mental health of human kind’. Similarities to ...
Lita Cosner
Diplomatic immunity is not a valid comparison. God is our Creator. He has the right to do with us what He wants, and because He is perfectly good and righteous, whatever He does is right. As creatures, we sometimes can't even understand God's reasons for acting as He does; He does not have to answer to us, and we don't have the standing to question Him.
Murray H.
I am with Mark Z. I would have liked to send the article to others but the last line would made it not really a good idea. It drags creation as written with it as well, seeing it comes from CMI. Overall it was a great article. Keep up the excellent work. Your a great writer.
Lita Cosner
Murray, I wrote that last line to highlight the hypocrisy of the question. It was never a question of supporting the children; the questioner wanted to silence our opposition to killing children by bringing up an irrelevant excuse. And creation is what tells us that we are made in the image of God, which is why we can't kill babies in the womb.
Judith S.
I have worked for six years at a pregnancy support centre, where we provide resources as well as mentoring, & have never heard of a girl or woman who used expense as her only (or even main) reason for wanting an abortion. Especially since the relaxation of the abortion laws, the most frequent reason is pressure from the mother's partner, family or peers, closely followed by the mother's inability to continue her lifestyle as she would wish (a subset of "expense", I suppose) but there is never only one reason. The number of times "It's legal so it can't be wrong" has come up is so, so sad. On the other hand, the number of women who have thanked us for helping them keep and raise their child is huge.
Jacquie D.
I’m sad to see that this issue is reduced to a dollar amount. We have become a world of selfish people. Unborn children are being aborted because they are an inconvenience. Stop trying to divert attention with large dollar amounts and making it sound like your abortion is justified because after all I’m not willing to pay for the raising of your child. If you kill someone I’m not going to go to jail for you either. Take responsibility for your own actions.
Jean H.
What about avoiding unwanted pregnancy in the first place? From abstinence to the pill to uterine implants to condoms, there are plenty of options available to women and to men. Seems to me avoidance is the only responsible, mature thing to do for men or women who don't want a child resulting from sexual activity.
Charles S.
Abortion is a world wide sin. The cost of raising a child differs greatly, but rearing cost is not the root of the sin of child murder. Whether or not the child becomes a world leader contributing to society or a missionary bringing the Gospel to lost sinners or a bum draining the resources of others; regardless God knew them in the womb. Abortion is man rebelliously asserting himself in the position of God. Idolatry.
J. R.
All great responses. You should all be running for Prime Minister of Canada!
Ron W.
They always seem to come up with some way to shift the blame. If we would teach ABOUT the financial and emotional responsibility BEFORE kids OR adults have sex, lets say in Sex Ed class in school, and about the commitment to raising a child and that sex is NOT a recreational activity, its for creating a child, perhaps...PERHAPS couples will think twice before "going all the way". Heaven forbid we teach kids about maturity and commitment! Marriage is meant to be the institution where a couple commits to each other and from within that they can raise children. Both are a commitment. People don't want that commitment. Its still the 60's with free "love" but its really immature love. And if you think about it, those people from the 60's -70's are now 50-70yrs old and are the "policy makers". The hippies that never grew up are in charge.
Dean L.
The argument this pro-choice person made is a typical diversion used to deflect responsibility onto pro-lifers. It's much like the argument that pro-lifers don't care about the suffering of a woman impregnated during rape or incest. Given that the number of abortions done for those reasons is extremely small relative to other reasons, that's a mere diversionary tactic as well. The bottom line is as Lita said; pro-choicers believe that every woman should have the right to end the life of her unborn child for the simple reason that she doesn't want him/her. There is no concession that the pro-life side could make that would ever get most pro-choicers to back down on that stance.
Joshua W.
I don't normally comment, but as it was requested on the INFObytes mail... The premise is irredeemably flawed. Even before you consider - as the reply does - the fact that people are willing to pay the price, it totally breaks down under numerical analysis. To be clear, I do not agree with the following, I am just following the materialistic-utilitarian logic to the conclusion. It should go without needing to be said that the logic is abominable; Humans are not units of economics, and one CANNOT forget the history of viewing people as economic engines, nor ignore the murders of well over a billion innocent children. ---- Lets assume that the alternative to being aborted is enslavement. After all, it has already been decided that this person is life unworthy of life, three fifths a person. From the premise-makers own utilitarian-materialistic worldview, such a person can be enslaved or disposed of without concern; history is filled with examples of this. Let's assume the enslavement practice is 6 hours a day, 5 days a week labour, rated at the Federal Minimum Wage, and labour begins at 20, ends at 66. (current social security retirement age) Work the numbers through, and the $230k is paid back over 20 years, while the lifetime earnings (46 years) are $538k. Which is 5.08% ROI, and therefore a safe long-term investment, and is a huge underestimate of the value, because costs are over-estimated while income is underestimated; use realistic numbers instead, and lifetime earnings in the US can easily exceed $1,000,000.


Children are investments, not costs.
Terry K.
We have so much information available to us. If you don't want children, that's ok... Take precautions that work. Don't irresponsibly have sex. That's self absorbed. It has always cost money to have children, so you make sacrifices. There are so many avenues of support and so many people who would adopt. KILLING a child inside a womb because you can't afford?... What's the real root of the decision?
Fr Michael A.
There is no principle on which to judge abortion, not on secular terms which disdains religious judgment. If there is no God then all things are permissible.
Lita Cosner
There are principles, such as intrinsically valuing human life, which is the basis of the small humanist pro-life movement. Of course, under the secular worldview, there is no reason to do this, but personally I would rather a secularist irrationally value human life than the alternative.
Cindy W.
What about women who want to abort for medical reasons? For example, if carrying the baby to term endangers the mother's life, or if the baby will be stillborn anyway.
Lita Cosner
I know someone whose mother was advised she would die if she carried her son to term. She did not follow medical advice because she loved her unborn child and was willing to die to give him a chance at life. As it happens, the doctors were wrong and they were both fine. But in circumstances such as an ectopic pregnancy where serious injury or death will certainly occur with no chance of the baby's survival, the removal of the pregnancy to save the mother's life is not sinful, because the death of the baby is not intended--as opposed to elective abortions, where a dead baby is the goal.

In cases where the child has conditions that are 'incompatible with life', we do not have the right to shorten that life via abortion. Many women have said in their experience that carrying their child and loving him or her for the few days or even hours he or she was able to live outside the womb gave them closure and helped them grieve properly. Adding the violence of an abortion (usually a late-term abortion by the time such conditions are discovered) does not help the mother or the baby. But also, a procedure to remove a baby who has already died from his or her mother's womb is also not the same as an abortion, because the child has already died and if not removed would cause serious injury and/or death to the mother.
John H.
I have a solution to this problem. "Don't add up the cost". Don't do the math. I have 5 children we raised on one income and somehow you get there. I wouldn't change a thing except have some more. They are just wonderful. Love them to bits!
David H.
Lucky God didn’t decide it would cost Him too much to give up His only son to save our sinful hides! He paid the ultimate price.
If it’s all about cost benefit analysis then human life is simply reduced to arithmetic. No one who’s had the chance to love and raise a child would agree.
This attitude is brutal and callous.
Frances S.
This discussion, particularly Lita's third point, brings to mind the demonstration of Solomon's wisdom in 1 Kings 3 - he determines the true mother of the child by ordering the child to be divided in half. The mother who truly loves her child is the one who is prepared to give up her child to the other woman to spare its precious life, a noble and heart-wrenching action.
Kathy K.
Mr. F. K. should thank his Creator God for his choice to write his opinion, and thank his parents that he wasn’t aborted because of outrageous upbringing costs, and is able to voice a comment such as he did because of the times we are in! Wow. Bottom line - abortion is murder. His words are from a person who has no clue what God has done and will do. God is still Creator, Sustainer of all, Redeemer, Savior, Comforter, Lord and Judge. I thought of my children and grandchildren as gifts from God. I wonder if this man has children. Regardless, he once was a child who was blessed with life. Someone chose to love and raise him into adulthood. How very sad that millions don’t get that chance. The thing about Christians is that they trust God in all areas of having and caring for children no matter what the case. God is sovereign, knows how populated the world is, and can handle things just fine, but he also knows the heart. And simply put, the selfish person who wants to murder a defenseless unborn infant will stand shamefully one day before him. We are all in His image - whether anyone wants it or not.
Susan M.
I feel sad about this whole issue. It’s sad to read the headlines of a mother charged with the death of her 4mth old baby. But she could’ve been allowed to have murdered it by abortion, when it was nearly 4mths in the womb, with the new laws trying to be brought in across Australia. My husband and I are one couple who would have adopted a number of children, not wanted by their mother’s, as we couldn’t have our own biological children. We therefore adopted two through inter country agencies. When a baby is wanted, it’s called a baby by the parents, while still in the womb. When the baby isn’t wanted, they call it a foetus, so they distance themselves emotionally from having love for this wonderful new life. We are fearfully and wonderfully made. God’s creation is amazing.
Susan B.
Isn't it incongruous that a planned pregnancy is celebrated and acknowledged as a 'baby/person/child/son or daughter' from the moment of conception, but an unwanted pregnancy is ... a blub of cells, like a cancerous growth that must be removed. So, soooo sad.
Robert N.
Good response to Mr F.K. thanks Lita! Hopefully he and other "Pro Choicers" are actually reading and thinking about what you have said. I think he is largely raising a Straw man argument to justify his statement that those who oppose abortion don't want to really look after the needs of the unborn/unwanted child. Whereas I'm pretty sure that Christians and those who support children not being aborted are very well represented in being ready to adopt, caring for mothers in need financially and emotionally, etc. Mind you, women and girls who have "unwanted" pregnancies have themselves to chose to respond to the offers of help, so getting the message out there to make the help known is important.
Lois F.
Maybe people need to forgo the 20 minutes or so to produce a baby. Why blame the child when it is your choice to have sex in the first place unless it is forced upon you.
Matthew H.
Another pro-abortionist completely owned. I would only add that he seems unsurprisingly oblivious to the fact that his own argument could be used to justify murdering already born human beings. Not just children, but on a macro level those that might be deemed to be an economic drain on society as well.
David C.
What happened to baby’s lives during the great flood of Genesis?
Lita Cosner
They perished along with all other life outside the Ark. Are you saying that because God has the right to take lives that He created, humans have the ability to play God? If that's the case, why stop with babies?
K J.
Is the questioner serious?? He basically equates raising a child to a monetary transaction. Sounds awful like prostitution, which,,,he'd better not be against, then, for his consistency.
Daniel J.
I agree with Cal. S.; Mr. F.K. had that snarky retort at the end coming. That was a well-formulated rebuttal, Lita.
Sam B.
Yeah it is OK by the pro-life hypocrites to murder millions of defenseless cows, pigs, chicken and lamb to indulge their taste buds when there is a healthy plant based alternative available.
Lita Cosner
So would you say that pro-abortion vegans are hypocrites? Or are humans the only 'animal' it is acceptable to kill?
Terence I.
Pro-abortionists, like many on the left, always have a canned response that is designed to shut down dialogue and make them right. This response seems like one of them. Once you counter their canned responses with facts or logic, they either attack you or disappear with nothing left in their attack quiver beyond their pre-fed responses because they are reacting emotionally rather than intellectually having thought things through. Fact is, life begins at conception with a full complement of DNA. That fact is recognized scientifically as textbooks demonstrate. A heartbeat and brainwaves are detectable in 30 days or less, signs of a living human being. Nearly all abortions occur after that point. Abortion is a form of murder of an unborn baby. (The word "fetus" means little one in Latin btq.) The discussion should rightfully begin there. All else is fluff designed to distract from the true reality of abortion.
Julie W.
Financial consideration is mostly certainly NOT the only reason behind abortions. I'm one of the lucky ones. I was adopted, practically before I was born. I grew up on stories of my adoption and have always been aware of how happy and grateful my adoptive parents were and are to have been able to adopt me. From those stories I know a little about my birth mother and her circumstances. I know that she came from a wealthy and influential family that was more than capable of raising me if they had chosen to. I know that she got pregnant while still in high school (by my calculations it would have been just before starting her senior year). And I know that her family insisted I be placed up for adoption immediately and that my adoption records be sealed. My mom also told me not to be mad or upset at my birth mother and her family because they chose to let me live when they could have just as easily chosen an abortion.
I know there are a million excuses for a woman to have an abortion, but there are so many more reasons not to - I'm one of them.
Dean D.
Yet we can afford $60,000 cars/trucks, $400,000 houses, $3,000 flat screen televisions and all sorts of toys, games and hobbies but no sacrifice for the life of a child. Disgusting! It appears we could "find the money" if we truly valued human life and made it a priority instead of our own desires.
Tammy S.
Thank you Lita, for another clear and well written response. I recently saw Abby Johnson give a defense of the life of a child in the womb, and it brought me to tears. She pointed out that this is not the first time that the argument that a human is, somehow, not actually human, has been used to justify a grievous and massive injustice against a whole group of people. The very same argument was used in Hitler's Nazi Germany against Jews, and again in the case of American slavery in the early history of this country. Unborn human persons never turn out as anything other than humans, and they have as much right to life as you or I.
Pratha S.
Abortions don't care about human life -- they just care about the money they get.Planned Parenthood recently admitted this by turning down{I believe}the Title X funds -- some 60 million dollars.This means that any organization that performs abortions will not get any government funding.Planned Parenthood admitted this recently by turning down this money -- something that has been known about them for a long time.The Bible makes it clear that EVERY life is precious to God -- and that the murdering of life is wrong.I hope and pray that all abortionists will come to know the Lord -- I almost shudder to think what will happen to them if they don't.
Steve B.
Great answer Lita, but people such as the one who wrote such a thoughtless question want change I've argued with atheist for many years and haven't see the die hard's change their way of thinking, they haven't the courage to examine their thoughts and they can't see they have few reasoning skills, they have been blinded by the original sin of self over God. If they only knew what we do. Pro-lifer Steve
Lita Cosner
Steve, there are a couple elements to why we should always give a good response in the hopes that someone will hear and change their mind. First, it's humanly impossible, but we never know when God will open a person's eyes, and we should always want to be used as part of that process. Second, I wasn't just writing to that person, but to everyone who would read the article who may not have known how to give a good response to that argument.
Kenneth A.
Thanks to CMI for all that you do, you are my go-to source for apologetics info. As far as this article, YOU NAILED IT Lita Cosner! What could I possibly add except to say that the individual you were answering obviously has a heart turned cold by Satan. I'll say a prayer for him that the Holy Spirit would open his eyes.
Cowboy Bob S.
I felt like a contestant on the American game show "Family Feud", clapping my hands and saying, "Good answer! Good answer!" Atheists and abortionists like to try and put those of us who disagree with them on the defensive with loaded questions and scenarios. If someone cannot answer a challenge to the satisfaction of the accuser, they act like they are vindicated in their fallacious thinking. Lita effectively points out that abortion is not just about finances, which negates the challenge. We need to be prepared to do likewise and be able to think rationally and be familiar with not only their arguments, but refutations for them as well. And keep learning. Abortion proponent, are you willing to learn the facts and also change your immoral lifestyle? I thought not. See? I can do it, too, just as fallaciously.
Mark Z.
CMI, you have said, “So now will you say that abortion is wrong because there is always someone willing to pay for that child’s upbringing? ‘I thought not.’”, consider this, Psalm 64:3
“They sharpen their tongues like swords” I am asking you to consider in whom your belief is in, when you believe in speaking this way. Then you should understand why this was spoken, Matthew 5:45 “that you may be children of your Father in heaven.” John 12:26 “Whoever serves me must follow me;“ I would like to speak about Matthew 5:45 for the benefit of the deceived for I have witnessed one say “I believe I am a child of the Devil”. Just as in the world there are children raised by strangers, the truth can be seen in the words of Matthew 5:45.
Josef L.
Lita is exactly right, there are always people willing to adopt children. Wouldn't a parent rather know their child has a chance at life with someone else, rather than murdered? Also, the problem with F.K.'s point is that it can be used in other situations. Like senior citizens in retirement homes. Should they be murdered as they are a financial burden? What about people who are hospitalized and are racking up medical bills... should they be murdered? Or what about prisoners who aren't contributing to society and are a huge financial burden, should they be murdered?
Peter C.
Excellent response as usual Lita. Here in Australia government has been tripping over it's own feet recently to make sure abortion is increasingly available. The arguments used are always the same and always sad. The baby is a possession and not a human being. Worse still in the A.C.T. they are making laws to state that animals that used to be classified as a possession are now sentient beings and are offered more protection under law than human babies in the womb. All because they will under no circumstances acknowledge God as our standard giver and creator. Thanks to CMI for continuing to uphold God and his revealed word to dark world.
Scott B.
As found in the typical American 9th-grade biology book, an entry-level characterization of life is that which has these four things: DNA, a metabolism, the ability to respond to stimulus, the ability to reproduce at maturity (assuming no health issues). Every unborn baby fulfills these requirements. The DNA/karyotype of the unborn is human. Therefore, abortion is the killing of a human: plain, simple, straightforward. Anyone who does not concede the above is anti-scientific in general, and anti-biology in particular, and has no legitimacy in debating biology or healthcare. Any MD that says otherwise should have his license revoked. Every politician that argues otherwise should be removed from office. How much the life costs to rear has no bearing on the biology definition of life. Furthermore, if a woman does not want to be pregnant, there is a solution: keep the pants on. This method is the true exercising of power over reproduction rights. Claiming to have the right to override the result of sex is the same as claiming to have the right to override the effects of gravity after jumping off the roof of a building — complete nonsense. The driver for abortion is selfishness, not cost. Any woman who demands that I pay for her baby must first obtain permission from me to have sex. I am always amazed at the shallowness and selfishness of the pro-abortion activists.
Lita Cosner
I feel we must acknowledge that some unwanted pregnancies occur through rape or incest; i.e., the circumstances are not the fault of the mother. We should have compassion for these mothers, but of course their children do not deserve the death penalty for the crimes of their fathers.
Lassi P.
Well argued anwer to not so well argued feedback. I think it is sad that people talk of womens "right to choose" when they actually mean the societys "right" to kill. I don't know if there be any statistics concerning it and I don't think there's much chance to get a realistic information for such, but am quite sure a big part of abortions happen under pressure fron say the grandparents of the child, the father and the society (e.g. via the media). So it is revealing for the "pro choisers" to not defend the truly jeopardiced right to choose not.
Dale P.
That was awesome! I love the truth and a well reasoned response. Thank you for all the great work you do in God's kingdom.
Tim L.
Abortion is murder. Pure and simple. People that support abortion simply think a mother should have the right to murder her child. People say that, in the interest of civil discourse, we should believe that people who disagrees with us have the best of intentions and are basically good people. I have no idea how it's possible to do that with someone who is defending mothers who murder their children.
Ryab D.
Another thing worth mentioning is in the US we have laws that say you can drop off a baby at any emergency facility(hospital, fire, police) that is less than one month old no questions asked. They will find a home for the baby. Given these systems and the ones mentioned in the article the finances should be the least of anyone’s concerns.
Yvonne R.
Having been in the wilderness of my pre Christian life, I am thankful to THE LORD JESUS for accepting me into HIS Kingdom, redirecting me in HIS way, removing me from my human way. We so need to know THE LORD JESUS for HIS direction, for our peace of mind, and personal satisfaction in every way. The LORD's way of HIS choosing the one we marry, HIS word in sex within marriage, there would be no need to abort a precious baby. Women abort babies because they are misusing, abusing the use of sex. They want to continue with their chosen illicit life style. There is no satisfaction without GOD being the ONE to lead us by HIS word, by HIS HOLY SPIRIT being the very best of experiences. GOD chose my man for which I am forever thankful. GOD never makes a mistake. Thank you Yvonne Robertson
Charles H.
Good article. One thing I have never understood is this excuse of costing, in this case, $230,000 to raise a child. That comes out to about $1000 a month. My wife and I have raised 7 sons and daughters. At no time did we ever even come close to spending that much. I would have to count our mortgage to get above that a month but then I would be paying that whether we had had our children or not. People like the one in this letter always seem to throw some large number out there as an excuse for murder.
Colin B.
I might decide that my teenage child becomes too expensive to keep up with, so I’ll have them put down. Exactly what is the difference between that and aborting a child because of potential expense??
Andrew H.
As a matter of information slave owners were reimbursed for the loss of their slaves. In fact there was a kind of justice in this.This was done by the British State using taxpayers money. The British State also used a considerable proportion of its resources to maintain the Royal Navy. One of the uses to which it put that Navy was to curtail the Slave Trade. This was not safe, easy or cheap work. Many Christians bought slaves then practiced manumission. Many Christians worked hard and suffered much abuse to have Slavery made illegal in the British Empire in 1833. Many christians today man safe houses which provide a place for ladies who come under pressure to abort their babies to avoid such sinful influences. Time is perhaps our most precious gift God has given, apart from His Son, and it is good to redeem that time in that way. We have all been given time as a gift and none of us should curtail another's time for our own personal convenience or any other reason apart from those sanctioned by God.
The reasoning used to sanction abortion is one major way to see that it is wrong. It is full of special pleading, ad hominem attacks and appeals to expediency. We are all paying the price for such sin and the judgement of History will be similar to the Judgement on Slavery.
Dalene L.
As a person organising prayer vigils at abortion clinics and standing myself for pro- life.I have often come up against this argument. Thank you for this well written response, Lita.
Bill P.
Mr. F.K. still doesn't get it. He talks about how much money it costs to raise a child and he forgets the most important thing a child needs when being raised. "LOVE" !! There have been countless families who were and are poor, yet these families were over flowing in love and did just fine raising their children. Of coarse he's not the only one who uses this excuse. Correct me if I'm wrong BUT was not the woman who founded "planned parenthood" married to a man who was very well off ? Her motivation for starting that Org. had nothing to do w/those who lacked money....It was started because it was motivated by "the lack of love". It is written: "one of the signs of the last days will be the the lack of natural affection" hence all the abortions (murders). YET if they would repent and turn back to The Lord He would have mercy on them.
Geoff C. W.
I question that figure of $230,000, as well. I'll eat my gumboots if there are no children in the US raised on far less than that!
Cal S.
I must say, I loved that little retort at the end of your reply.

Considering the tone of the original message, I thought it was well deserved.

Comments are automatically closed 14 days after publication.