Karma reasons for concrete message



    Global Moderator

    Posts: 2728
  • Darwins +162/-7

I am not adopted, nor have I given up a child for adoption nor do I know anyone directly who has given up a child for adoption. However, I do know various parents who have adopted children.

There's a weird dual-attitude about adoption in our society.

There is a very, very weird double-standard about adoption in our society and it is appalling to me how many pro-life people do not even remotely care to acknowledge it much less address it.

Here are the societal viewpoints on adoption that I witness from my perspective:

(1) You adopt a child when you cannot procreate. This inherently creates a feeling that adopted children are somehow lesser children. There are a lot of children who can be adopted and since few people are standing in line because they think that they can create better ones, adoption becomes a backup plan. Adopted children do have some holes in their history. Unlike biological children to whom a visual or behavioral call back to a parent can be made, adopted children have unknown histories (this is neither good nor bad, just something that is not immediately recognizable and relatable). I think this is an innate conflict and it is displayed in other creatures. We can get over it, but we have to train ourselves to get over it -- and we're not doing that.[1]

(2) While abortion is a mortal sin and adoption is an option, there is an innate desire to maintain one's own children. Giving them up for adoption is betraying nature. It can be very difficult for the mother. I am sure that the hormones of pregnancy do something to a mother's mind that causes her to cling to her children. If that didn't occur, humanity would not have survived. However, if we can train ourselves to do all sorts of things, and if raising children properly is so damn important, why can't we train ourselves to consider adoption as a solution and not merely an option? Why can't we even promote smart adoptions? We expect that if you have the financial wherewithal, even remotely, you should keep that damn child you created and live with the consequences of your behaviors. This is utterly idiotic. Just because you have a great income or a lot of money in the bank, you are not automatically going to be a good parent. The parenting education we give kids is to keep them from getting pregnant. It doesn't appear to encourage adoption as an option or recognize the courage and intelligence of the choice to give up your child(ren) for adoption.

Religious organizations always claim that they will find ways to help young (almost always) single mothers survive that unexpected pregnancy. They claim that they will assist the mother with some monetary help and, of course, parochial help with everything else. Churches do not promote adoption -- at least not the giving up part. They are accepting of the parents who receive but not the parents who give. This attitude transcends religion to society as a whole. If churches aren't advocating adoption, then society won't, either.

Essentially, adoption is part of the virgin-whore paradox. It's okay for men to go have sex, but it's not okay for women to have sex. And since society views man-on-man sex as an abomination, who the hell else are men going to engage in sex besides women? Goats? How many of us know the expression "You have made your bed, so you must lie in it!" Why do children have to lie in the same bed as their parents for the next 40-50-60 years? Why can't those children get a better start somewhere else?

Our society puts more thought, care and actions into controlling the supply of cats and dogs than we do the supply of children.

 1. One notable exception is when parents take home the wrong children from the hospital. I have read about cases where some parents thought the child they brought home was strange for various reasons, but dismissed it later. In other words, they get over these minor differences.
Changed Change Reason Date