{"id":1081092,"date":"2021-12-03T15:29:24","date_gmt":"2021-12-03T20:29:24","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/?p=1081092"},"modified":"2021-12-03T15:29:26","modified_gmt":"2021-12-03T20:29:26","slug":"bats-lunacy-ben-shapiro-gives-17-point-response-to-nyt-op-ed-justifying-abortion-citing-trauma-of-adoption","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/bats-lunacy-ben-shapiro-gives-17-point-response-to-nyt-op-ed-justifying-abortion-citing-trauma-of-adoption\/","title":{"rendered":"\u2018Bats*** Lunacy\u2019: Ben Shapiro Gives 17-Point Response To NYT Op-Ed Justifying Abortion Citing \u2018Trauma\u2019 Of Adoption"},"content":{"rendered":"<aside class=\"mashsb-container mashsb-main mashsb-stretched\"><div class=\"mashsb-box\"><div class=\"mashsb-count mash-medium\" style=\"float:left\"><div class=\"counts mashsbcount\">32<\/div><span class=\"mashsb-sharetext\">SHARES<\/span><\/div><div class=\"mashsb-buttons\"><a class=\"mashicon-facebook mash-medium mash-nomargin mashsb-noshadow\" href=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/sharer.php?u=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservativenewsdaily.net%2Fbreaking-news%2Fbats-lunacy-ben-shapiro-gives-17-point-response-to-nyt-op-ed-justifying-abortion-citing-trauma-of-adoption%2F\" target=\"_top\" rel=\"nofollow\"><span class=\"icon\"><\/span><span class=\"text\">Facebook<\/span><\/a><a class=\"mashicon-twitter mash-medium mash-nomargin mashsb-noshadow\" href=\"https:\/\/twitter.com\/intent\/tweet?text=&amp;url=https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/?p=1081092&amp;via=ConservNewsDly\" target=\"_top\" rel=\"nofollow\"><span class=\"icon\"><\/span><span class=\"text\">Twitter<\/span><\/a><a class=\"mashicon-subscribe mash-medium mash-nomargin mashsb-noshadow\" href=\"#\" target=\"_top\" rel=\"nofollow\"><span class=\"icon\"><\/span><span class=\"text\">Subscribe<\/span><\/a><div class=\"onoffswitch2 mash-medium mashsb-noshadow\" style=\"display:none\"><\/div><\/div>\n            <\/div>\n                <div style=\"clear:both\"><\/div><\/aside>\n            <!-- Share buttons by mashshare.net - Version: 4.0.47--><p>Daily Wire editor emeritus Ben Shapiro ripped apart a Friday op-ed in The New York Times which sought to justify abortion citing the difficulty and trauma of adoption.<\/p>\n<p>Democratic digital strategist Elizabeth Spiers wrote a <a href=\"https:\/\/www.nytimes.com\/2021\/12\/03\/opinion\/adoption-supreme-court-amy-coney-barrett.html\">piece<\/a> in the Times published on Friday arguing that the process of adoption is \u201cinfinitely more difficult, expensive, dangerous and potentially traumatic\u201d than aborting an unborn child.<\/p>\n<p>\u201cThis article from Elizabeth Spiers in the NYT is true, bats*** lunacy,\u201d Shapiro <a href=\"https:\/\/twitter.com\/benshapiro\/status\/1466771298705711113\">tweeted<\/a> on Friday before launching into a rebuttal of the Times essay. \u201cBearing a child and giving it up for adoption is significantly less difficult, expensive, dangerous and potentially traumatic for the child than, you know, stabbing it in the head and sucking it into a sink.\u201d<\/p>\n<p>Spiers, who was given up for adoption and raised in a stable, two-parent household, says her adoption experience \u201cwas what many would consider idyllic\u201d as she \u201cgrew up in a home where I knew every day that I was loved.\u201d She cites the heartbreak her birth mother, who she has since reconnected with, has suffered since putting her up for adoption, however.<\/p>\n<p>\u201cAdoption is not always an unalloyed good. It\u2019s a complicated choice in a situation that has no right or wrong answer,\u201d she says.<\/p>\n<p>Spiers\u2019 birth mother and adoptive mother both oppose abortions, which Spiers appears to attribute to their religious beliefs. Spiers says that her birth and adoptive parents often use her own story as a \u201cpolitical football\u201d as an example of what an abortion could kill.<\/p>\n<p>\u201cBoth Maria and my mom, Alice, oppose abortion on religious grounds. My mom is white and Southern Baptist; Maria is Hispanic and Pentecostal. Both like to point to me to justify their beliefs, saying that had Maria gotten an abortion, I would not exist,\u201d she writes. \u201cIt\u2019s a familiar argument: The anti-abortion movement likes to invoke Nobel Prize winners who might never have materialized, or potential adoptees who might have cured cancer, if they hadn\u2019t been aborted at eight weeks.\u201d<\/p>\n<p>Later in the article, Spiers attributed the attraction between mother and child developed during pregnancy to \u201cbiological brainwashing,\u201d which she says leads to much heartache for mothers who chose to give their children up for adoption. She also cites the \u201crelinquishment trauma\u201d adopted children may have after bonding with their mothers during pregnancy.<\/p>\n<p>Adoption \u201cis life changing, irrevocable, and not to be taken lightly,\u201d Spiers concludes. \u201cIt often causes trauma, even when things work out, and it\u2019s a disservice to adoptees and their families, biological and adopted, to pretend otherwise in service of a neat political narrative.\u201d<\/p>\n<p>Shapiro dissected the article in a lengthy twitter thread, unloading on Spiers\u2019 justification for abortion in a 17-point response. Shapiro wrote, citing passages of Spiers\u2019 article along the way:<\/p>\n<p><em>This article from Elizabeth Spiers in the NYT is true, bats*** lunacy. Let us examine the ways.<\/em><\/p>\n<p><em>1. Bearing a child and giving it up for adoption is significantly less difficult, expensive, dangerous and potentially traumatic for the child than, you know, stabbing it in the head and sucking it into a sink.<\/em><\/p>\n<p><em>2. Adoption is often a pretty good thing, as the author acknowledges. But wait\u2026she\u2019ll buy it back momentarily.<\/em><\/p>\n<p><em>3. Your birth mom wanted to give birth to you and give you up for adoption, and you benefitted from that. Now you argue that your birth mom is upset she missed years with you. You know what would have stolen all of the years? ALL OF THEM? Killing you in the womb.<\/em><\/p>\n<p><em>4. Both your birth mom and adopted mom are happy with the adoption decision. But you\u2019re paternalistic enough to doubt their happiness.<\/em><\/p>\n<p><em>5. You also resent being \u201cused as a political football\u201d because you were adopted. Glad you\u2019re here to resent things. You know what would have prevented that? You being aborted.<\/em><\/p>\n<p><em>6. You say that you think abortion is a form of health care. But this entire article is an acknowledgement that abortion takes a life, because you\u2019re here to write the article.<\/em><\/p>\n<p><em>7. You say that Maria still feels the pain of adoption and you say that adoption is traumatizing. You know what could be painful for the mother and is certainly both painful, traumatizing and deadly for the child? You guessed it.<\/em><\/p>\n<p><em>8. You say adoption is not an \u201cunalloyed good,\u201d that there are no \u201cright or wrong answers.\u201d I\u2019m pretty sure I found the wrong answer, though: killing you in the womb.<\/em><\/p>\n<p><em>9. This take that human biology is an imposition is completely pathological. \u201cForced to give birth\u201d implies that the intervention is the pregnancy rather than the abortion. And the \u201cbiological design\u201d by which you become attached to your child is not an evil. This is sick.<\/em><\/p>\n<p><em>10. If you\u2019re worried that the biological bond between mother and child will be \u201ctaken away\u201d by adoption, I know of something else that will take away that bond. Permanently. It rhymes with shmabortion.<\/em><\/p>\n<p><em>11. Adoption is certainly<\/p>\n<p><\/em><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Daily Wire editor emeritus Ben Shapiro ripped apart a Friday op-ed in The New York Times which sought to justify abortion citing the difficulty and trauma of adoption.Democratic digital strategist Elizabeth Spiers wrote a piece in the Times published on Friday arguing that the process of adoption is \u201cinfinitely more difficult, expensive, dangerous and potentially traumatic\u201d than aborting an unborn child.\u201cThis article from Elizabeth Spiers in the NYT is true, bats*** lunacy,\u201d Shapiro tweeted on Friday before launching into a rebuttal of the Times essay. \u201cBearing a child and giving it up for adoption is significantly less difficult, expensive, dangerous and potentially traumatic for the child than, you know, stabbing it in the head and sucking it into a sink.\u201dSpiers, who was given up for adoption and raised in a stable, two-parent household, says her adoption experience \u201cwas what many would consider idyllic\u201d as she \u201cgrew up in a home where I knew every day that I was loved.\u201d She cites the heartbreak her birth mother, who she has since reconnected with, has suffered since putting her up for adoption, however.\u201cAdoption is not always an unalloyed good. It\u2019s a complicated choice in a situation that has no right or wrong answer,\u201d she says.Spiers\u2019 birth mother and adoptive mother both oppose abortions, which Spiers appears to attribute to their religious beliefs. Spiers says that her birth and adoptive parents often use her own story as a \u201cpolitical football\u201d as an example of what an abortion could kill.\u201cBoth Maria and my mom, Alice, oppose abortion on religious grounds. My mom is white and Southern Baptist; Maria is Hispanic and Pentecostal. Both like to point to me to justify their beliefs, saying that had Maria gotten an abortion, I would not exist,\u201d she writes. \u201cIt\u2019s a familiar argument: The anti-abortion movement likes to invoke Nobel Prize winners who might never have materialized, or potential adoptees who might have cured cancer, if they hadn\u2019t been aborted at eight weeks.\u201dLater in the article, Spiers attributed the attraction between mother and child developed during pregnancy to \u201cbiological brainwashing,\u201d which she says leads to much heartache for mothers who chose to give their children up for adoption. She also cites the \u201crelinquishment trauma\u201d adopted children may have after bonding with their mothers during pregnancy.Adoption \u201cis life changing, irrevocable, and not to be taken lightly,\u201d Spiers concludes. \u201cIt often causes trauma, even when things work out, and it\u2019s a disservice to adoptees and their families, biological and adopted, to pretend otherwise in service of a neat political narrative.\u201dShapiro dissected the article in a lengthy twitter thread, unloading on Spiers\u2019 justification for abortion in a 17-point response. Shapiro wrote, citing passages of Spiers\u2019 article along the way:This article from Elizabeth Spiers in the NYT is true, bats*** lunacy. Let us examine the ways.1. Bearing a child and giving it up for adoption is significantly less difficult, expensive, dangerous and potentially traumatic for the child than, you know, stabbing it in the head and sucking it into a sink.2. Adoption is often a pretty good thing, as the author acknowledges. But wait\u2026she\u2019ll buy it back momentarily.3. Your birth mom wanted to give birth to you and give you up for adoption, and you benefitted from that. Now you argue that your birth mom is upset she missed years with you. You know what would have stolen all of the years? ALL OF THEM? Killing you in the womb.4. Both your birth mom and adopted mom are happy with the adoption decision. But you\u2019re paternalistic enough to doubt their happiness.5. You also resent being \u201cused as a political football\u201d because you were adopted. Glad you\u2019re here to resent things. You know what would have prevented that? You being aborted.6. You say that you think abortion is a form of health care. But this entire article is an acknowledgement that abortion takes a life, because you\u2019re here to write the article.7. You say that Maria still feels the pain of adoption and you say that adoption is traumatizing. You know what could be painful for the mother and is certainly both painful, traumatizing and deadly for the child? You guessed it.8. You say adoption is not an \u201cunalloyed good,\u201d that there are no \u201cright or wrong answers.\u201d I\u2019m pretty sure I found the wrong answer, though: killing you in the womb.9. This take that human biology is an imposition is completely pathological. \u201cForced to give birth\u201d implies that the intervention is the pregnancy rather than the abortion. And the \u201cbiological design\u201d by which you become attached to your child is not an evil. This is sick.10. If you\u2019re worried that the biological bond between mother and child will be \u201ctaken away\u201d by adoption, I know of something else that will take away that bond. Permanently. It rhymes with shmabortion.11. Adoption is certainly less traumatic for the child \u2014 remember, the person writing this is a woman who was adopted \u2014 than being killed.12. She says there\u2019s a difference between 40 weeks and 4 weeks, but it is doubtful she would be fine with late term abortion restrictions.13. BIOLOGICAL BRAINWASHING???!!!! To love your kid????!!!!!14. More \u201cbiological brainwashing\u201d insanity. And you have to love the argument that a mother can\u2019t choose to put her child up for adoption because of that biological brainwashing but can choose to kill it.15. Then she makes the utterly specious argument that pro-lifers ignore the problems of child-rearing. That argument is always idiotic[.] Pro-lifers do care about raising kids. But the argument itself is nonsensical. It is like arguing that we should not ban murder of the homeless unless we also provide them state-subsidized housing. You can argue for the housing, but the ban on murder is non-negotiable.16. Only Democrats talk about women being \u201cpunished\u201d with a child, a la Barack Obama. No pro-lifer talks this way.17. I can think of a trauma for a child far worse than relinquishment trauma. Can you?The Daily Wire is one of America\u2019s fastest-growing conservative media companies and counter-cultural outlets for news, opinion, and entertainment. Get inside access to The Daily Wire by becoming a member.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":70,"featured_media":2315279,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_mo_disable_npp":"","fifu_image_url":"","fifu_image_alt":"","footnotes":""},"categories":[],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-1081092","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1081092","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/70"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=1081092"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1081092\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/2315279"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=1081092"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=1081092"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=1081092"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}