Some Comments from the Peanut Gallery
Why is it automatically a wonderful thing that this baby survived? Who is that better for–the baby? Why is it better for him? Because there’s a chance he’s not mentally or physically affected by his mother’s potential drug or alcohol abuse? (After all, she threw him in the toilet; what are the chances she didn’t abuse substances while pregnant?) Is it because he might survive to one day get to know the lovely family that raised his lovely mother who threw him out like trash? Is is wonderful because the baby might not grow up to be a felon or a drug addict who is obviously dependant on the system in some way like his useless mother? Is is because it will only cost hundreds of thousands of dollars for his medical care (which the state will inevitably foot the tab for)? Why does this benefit, exactly? The baby? God?
You’re an idiot. This world is full of too many people. So many children are born into lives of suffering, only to later become useless leeches on society or violent thieves or drug dealers. It’s obviously not their fault; it’s just the way it is. And when fate snuffs out a little baby that’s doomed to a life of shit, then a real miracle has happened. But when the baby lives—that’s what lets us know that there really is no God.
You are obviously such a simpleton, I wouldn’t expect you to be able to wrap your mind around such a concept.
I’m the simpleton, you are assuming that she had a substance abuse problem. There is no indication that she does. Also, this baby has now been adopted, so no matter what her problems are of no consquences.