Steve Jobs on Abortion and Adoption

Post Author: Bill Pratt 

I’ve been reading the Steve Jobs biography by Walter Isaacson and came across one of the saddest cases of moral confusion I’ve seen in a long time.

Jobs is in his mid-twenties and is sleeping with a girl named Chrisann Brennan. They aren’t married, of course, because Jobs wasn’t interested. As long as he could have sex with her whenever he wanted, why would he marry her?

At some point, she gets pregnant and announces it to Steve. What is his reaction? Below is a quote from the biography:

There was no discussion of marriage . “I knew that she was not the person I wanted to marry, and we would never be happy, and it wouldn’t last long,” Jobs later said. “I was all in favor of her getting an abortion, but she didn’t know what to do. She thought about it repeatedly and decided not to, or I don’t know that she ever really decided— I think time just decided for her.”

Not only was he sleeping with a woman not his wife, but when he got her pregnant, his solution was to kill the baby because it might inconvenience him. But listen to what Brennan says next:

Brennan told me that it was her choice to have the baby: “He said he was fine with an abortion but never pushed for it.” Interestingly, given his own background, he was adamantly against one option. “He strongly discouraged me putting the child up for adoption,” she said.

Let me spell this out for you. Jobs was OK with Brennan killing the child, but he was adamantly opposed to Brennan putting the baby up for adoption!! What is especially cruel about this is that Jobs was himself adopted by wonderful parents who basically gave him everything he ever wanted.

In his twisted mind, it would be better for a person to be dead than be adopted. Make sense to you? I hope not.

  • sean

    Jobs gave up religion when he realized it meant God let little African children starve even thought God could effortlessly end their suffering. (At a young age he realized his internal moral compass was far superior to ant omnipotent God’s.) He, like most secular people, didn’t share your belief that aborting a fetus is the same as killing a child. That’s a key distinction I think you’ve missed. I do agree that his opposition to adoption is strange though.

  • A fetus is a full-fledged member of the human species. That’s what science tells us. It’s only when emotions and desires to avoid responsibility for bearing children enters the picture that people get “confused” about what science clearly and unequivocally tells us.

    It cracks me up that secularists who go on and on about science being the answer to everything suddenly doubt the findings of science when it gets in the way of their sex life. And believe, abortion is all about the freedom to have sex without consequences.

    By the way, as I read the Jobs biography, I see that he is deeply immoral in many areas of his life. So it’s pretty strange that you think his internal moral compass would be superior and omnipotent God. It clearly wasn’t.

  • sean

    Jobs was a deeply strange man, and he made choices in his life that I think you and I would both seriously question. Thinking on it, he wasn’t all that secular. An atheist to be sure, but he was “spiritual” to whatever extent that means something.

    We defiantly differ on what we think science says regarding fetuses and humans, but I can tell you the experts (scientists) agree with me.

    I’ll have a look back at some of your posts about this subject. I’m almost inclined to believe I have simply forgotten them, because I can scarcely believe I wouldn’t have discussed this point with you already.

  • Andrew Ryan

    Surely abortion IS a consequence? And regardless of you thinking rape victims should still carry any resulting children, it’s an odd argument to say these women are having the ‘freedom’ of consequence-free sex when they had no freedom in that sex. You may reply that these cases are the minority, but then you should say ‘abortion is MOSTLY about the freedom etc’, rather ALL.

  • OK. Mostly. Obviously a rape victim is a different case.

  • Paul MG giggles

    They starve because humans colonized their land, taking their resources and retarding their development extensively. How did God do that?

  • Paul MG giggles

    Also, any “internal moral compass” is a product of religious/philosophical concepts that spread through society through enculturalization, i.e., socialization. An athiest who is “moral” must adhere in some degree to Judeo-Christian principles to be thus.