Southern Baptist Leader Has Had It With These Single Moms Keeping Their Babies
Former (see note at end of post) Southern Baptist leader Richard Land has some insight into the scourge of single motherhood: Obviously, abortion is never a valid choice, but according to Land, keeping the baby is also a terrible idea. Instead of keeping their babies, these knocked-up sluts should stop being so selfish and give their babies up for adoption, because, you know, King Solomon. There are a lot of Christian couples out there who would just love to bring up a baby with the moral values of Richard Land, after all -- talk about an incentive!
In an editorial for National Adoption Day last Saturday, Land, who until recently was the president of the Southern Baptists' "Ethics & Religious Liberty Commission," starts by mentioning the "100,000 children in foster care in America" looking for a forever home, and then immediately forgets these older, less-cute non-baby children because he would far rather lecture pregnant single women. It goes without saying that he says abortion is murder, so we'll just look at his compelling case for why single women should never raise a baby alone.
Obviously, the most important factor is that the child raised by a single mom is denied some of the joys of patriarchy:
Keeping the baby is almost never preferable to allowing a baby to be adopted into a solid, faithful Christian home. A single mother who keeps her baby is quite often denying that baby the father that God wants for that baby, and every baby, to have. Furthermore, in most circumstances, keeping the baby circumscribes and forecloses both the mother's and the baby's economic futures in tragic and unfortunate ways.
Of course, there's also the possibility of using birth control, but for some reason, contraception never gets mentioned. Possibly it just slipped his mind.
As proof that keeping your baby is selfish, when you have the chance to give it away, Land cites the story of Solomon:
If the mother is doing what is best for her baby (one of the defining marks of maternal love), she will part with her baby so that it will have the future God intended for him or her to have. The Old Testament story of the two harlots who both had babies and one died in the night comes to mind (1Kings 3). Both women claimed the surviving baby was their child and wanted the king to give the baby to them. King Solomon decided to have the baby divided in two and each be given half. Immediately, the real mother told the king to give the baby to the other woman in order to save the child's life. In other words, she was thinking of the child's best interest, not her own.
Got it, harlots? If you love your baby, you'll let a decent person raise it rather than allowing it to be cut in half, which is precisely equivalent to sentencing the poor thing to grow up without a father. Land doesn't address situations where the choices are something other than adoption or bisection, presumably because that would introduce a dangerous element of moral relativism.
Update/Clarification Wonkette Operative "Lisa Z" sends this clarification on Mr. Land's status with the Southern Baptist Confection, which we run verbatim, 'cause it's that good:
Richard Land is still a horrible person but he is not with the Southern Baptist Convention any longer, he lost that gig over a nasty plagiarism charge related to Trayvon Martin. Apparently he stole some horrible thing he said on his radio show from some other horrible person. Land is now head of some Baptist college in the East Jesus, North Carolina.
But fear not dear Wonkadoos: Land's replacement is the equally horrid Russell Moore. He recently hit the news for saying wives who aren't subservient to their husbands are "preaching a false gospel." To which I reply: WHERE THE FUCK DO THEY FIND YOU PEOPLE???!!!
The More You Know!