scholarships, adoption, open adoption, adoption vs. abortion

Adoption Myths Debunked

"Right to Adopt"

There is no such thing as a "right" to adopt. When the parents of a child are deceased or proven to be unfit, and there is no adult relative who wants to raise the child, the best situation for the child should be found.

There is no such thing as a "right" to adopt. Being raised in a foreign culture by an unrelated white American woman who is advancing in age is unlikely to be the best option that can be found for a child. People who have serious mental illness are not being "discriminated against" if someone else seems better suited to raise a child. People who did not want to have to sacrifice their career, wealth or other interests to have children do not deserve a child. People who are infertile due to STDs or unhealthy habits do not deserve a child. People who don't want to ruin their figure of just don't want to be bothered with a pregnancy do not deserve a child. People who are single or gay do not deserve a child. No one deserves a child - it is the needs of the child that must be met.

There is no such thing as a "right" to adopt. Children who are already suffering the loss of family do not need to be forced to live a lie. Those people caring for them did not give birth to them and are not their real family. Not every country issues falsified birth certificates stating that the adopter is the one that gave birth. In many countries when an unrelated person raises a child, the child's name is not changed and her identity is not hidden from her.

There is no such thing as a "right" to adopt. The government does not provide services to get desirable women away from less affluent husbands to provide to bachelors who say they will "love them as if they were their own". Neither should the government provide or allow adoption "services" designed to get "adoptable" babies and small children away from naive single mothers and less affluent families to provide them to paying customers who claim they will "love them as if they were their own".

There is no such thing as a "right" to adopt. "Adoption" is really separating family members with the intent to use a child as if she was your own. "Adoption" is a sick, feudal social construct.

In China, back when wealthy men had many wives and concubines, the first wife had the highest ranking social status. If the first wife was infertile, she might use a lower level concubine to as the source of a baby. As in the "open" adoptions of today, the concubine might see her child, but she did not dare say "That is my son and I am his mother." Adoption is a sick, feudal social construct. There is no"right" to adopt just as there is no right to sleep with some other person's husband.

Gays, lesbians, heterosexuals, bisexuals, wealthy persons, "Christians", the mentally ill and less affluent people who can "really love a child" all claim they have a "right" to adopt. By comparison, suppose there is a person who can "really love" a nice car or truck. If someone else has the car of their dreams, and they have no car should they be allowed to hire a shyster to "help" the owner understand why she must give her car a "better life"? A child is not a commodity like a car is. She is a human being and so are her family members. These families do not deserve to be separated, like slave holder separating families. Whether the people who acquire the child treat her well or not has nothing to do with it - this is a horrendous injustice.

Next