Another reason USA want to ban abortions? TW, Child trafficking

[RoRoRoh]

Every day 55 children dissappear from the USA Foster are system.
Many into human trafficking systems, never to be seen again.

When I first heard this theory it seemed very 'tinfoil hat' but how many of these rich old white men running the country found out to be corrupted pervs?!

Article here, TW very hard to read

Could one of the reasons the US wants to ban abortions be to keep a supply of children entering the Foster are system for trafficking?

[RoRoRoh]

Paedophile rings have to get children from somewhere and like the article says, children from stable homes with caring families are too hard to make dissappear quietly.

Forcing women to carry unwanted pregnancies to term will leave them with little option but to put children into Foster care.

Also how can prolifers think this is preferable to never being born?!

[TruthHertz]

No, I don't think the US government are trying to ban abortion to increase the supply of children for paedophiles. That's bonkers.

[GCRich]

@TruthHertz

No, I don't think the US government are trying to ban abortion to increase the supply of children for paedophiles. That's bonkers.

Part of the purpose is to increase the supply of children for adoption, and you can bet your life that some are paedophiles, so it's not entirely bonkers.

[Thelnebriati]

Paedophile rings operate in plain sight within respectable organisations. Look at the scope of the IICSA before you make any judgements about a risk being bonkers.

[ICanTuckMyBoobsInMyPockets]

55 children per day is over 20,000 per year

I urge you to use some critical thinking on those figures.

Maybe start with this open.spotify.com/episode/5JyAdpdVVV8ZKQTRyrxqiu?si=WvDVtN-jTZ-M_s6wXeOXUg&utm_source=copy-link

[gwenneh]

@GCRich

Part of the purpose is to increase the supply of children for adoption, and you can bet your life that some are paedophiles, so it's not entirely bonkers.

Again, logically, there are already an oversupply of children available to adopt. Increasing it makes no sense.

[Teapot13]

Are you Q?

[PlanetNormal]

🙄

The US does NOT ‘want to ban abortions’. ‘Child trafficking’ has nothing to do with it. Abortion has NOT been banned in America, nor is it likely to be.

OP, I suggest you inform yourself about what is really going on in the US regarding abortion. The Supreme Court has overturned Roe v Wade, which means individual states are now able to set their own laws as decided by their own democratically elected politicians. Many of the biggest & most important states, eg California, Illinois, New York, Florida, Massachusetts, Washington, Oregon etc etc have no intention of removing women’s rights to abortion. Quite the opposite, in fact.

[WarriorN]

It's not a conscious direct reason but dr suzanne forbes-vierling does describe how the whole patriarchal system in the US profits from women's bodies and seeks to control them. Links to racist past of selling and using the bodies of slaves as currency and for abuse.

Hospitals do make a lot of money from the placentas for example, as well as charging for maternity services.

It's not a conspiracy but an observed systemic process. And yes, children are being trafficked from care.

[WarriorN]

Her points are also around the fact that there are fewer children in care who are white and more being trafficked who are POC so the system is both anti female and also racist.

[MangyInseam]

Isn't this a bit like suggesting that some people want to keep abortions legal so they have a nice supply of human fetal parts to flog?

Get a grip.

[danceswiththewolves]

It sounds bonkers but nothing would surprise me.