Page 5 of 6 FirstFirst 123456 LastLast
Results 81 to 100 of 106
  1. #81  
    Question for shopharim:
    Do you think seatbelt are a bad thing too? after all if we all drive by the rules we would not have accidents either?

    Human nature has a great sexdrive especially in our teens. That is the way we are build.
    So either we get married say between 16 and 21 or we go against our nature and if you are religious God made us so we go against the way god made us?
    I cannot see the logic in that point..

    Yes abstinance would work best... if you ignore nature..
    Since's I 'm a realist I like to face the facts and limit problems..
    <IMG WIDTH="200" HEIGHT="50" SRC=http://www.visorcentral.com/images/visorcentral.gif> (ex)VisorCentral Discussion Moderator
    Do files get embarrassed when they get unzipped?
  2. #82  
    Quote Originally Posted by DeathtoToasters
    Biological data is NOT a reason to keep a child with a family if that family is incapable of loving, caring and providing a good home for that child.

    If you believe that just because someone is a biological child of someone is a reason to keep someone in the home despite the above mentioned things....well then, there is nothing more I can say.
    Ah, but pap's who are willing to pay a lot of money to adoption agencies, private brokers, etc. ARE a good reason for adoption... at least for the adoption industry's pockets.

    (note the sarcasm please)

    By the way, my BM was in her mid 20's, (hardly a drunk teen - is that how you put it?) gainfully employeed and capable of loving, caring anbd providing for a good home. But tell that to society/family/church who deemed her unfit because she was unmarried.

    Yes, I do believe everything should be done to keep the child with the biological family. All avenues should be investigated (aunts, uncles, grandparents, etc) before placing the child in foster care.

    ******* Nation is not my website. It is not a search or reunite organization.
  3. #83  
    Quote Originally Posted by lb505
    Ah, but pap's who are willing to pay a lot of money to adoption agencies, private brokers, etc. ARE a good reason for adoption... at least for the adoption industry's pockets.

    (note the sarcasm please)

    By the way, my BM was in her mid 20's, (hardly a drunk teen - is that how you put it?) gainfully employeed and capable of loving, caring anbd providing for a good home. But tell that to society/family/church who deemed her unfit because she was unmarried.

    Yes, I do believe everything should be done to keep the child with the biological family. All avenues should be investigated (aunts, uncles, grandparents, etc) before placing the child in foster care.

    ******* Nation is not my website. It is not a search or reunite organization.
    I agree with you that people who are paying up-wards of $20k to agencies are being 'raped' and taken advantage of.

    There are bad people in ALL aspects of life who will take advantage of anyone for a dollar.

    I agree that all avenues should be taken. I have not said anything different.

    About your BM. I cannot comment on that. I am not her, do not know her situation etc. I didn't say that two 16 year old drunk teens were the reason for all adoptive kids out there.

    This is the problem, you are taking everything I say to the extreme and not realizing that every situation is different.

    The BM of my child was a 39 year old married woman who already had 3 kids LIVING with her.

    Her husband and her separated for a while, she had a fling and there came my child.

    So obviously I don't subscribe to the ALL 16 year old theory. If you would please RE-READ my statements you will see the context of how I wrote that.

    I wrote it to talk about the frustration of not being able to have a child naturally.

    My child was never in foster care.

    Do you believe that the BM of my child should have look at her family for every possible avenue before going for a private adoption?? The whole point for her was privacy. The only people in her whole family that know are her husband, and her mother who helped take care of her through her pregnancy. For the last trimester my wife and I took care of her.

    So although someone else in her family may have had the MEANS to take care of my child, you think they should have at the sacrifice of everyone else's feelings and lives?

    Sometimes placing within the family is worse then adoption.

    Now when you are talking about foster care...well I don't have a lot of experience about that. Like I said, out adoption was a private one.

    BTW...I said the website in your signature..not YOUR website. I still think it is a terrible way to make a point....to classify adoptive children or whatever their exact situation is as *******. They obviously have alot of issues to work through.

    If someone tried to tell me that about my child...they would be eating their teeth.
  4. #84  
    This will likely get me flamed but reading this and looking at the website mentioned above leads me to this thought. I am not stating an opinion on open records either way. This is just observation.

    If the birth parents wanted to be known wouldnt they make it so? I know some states have laws and such but I am sure that the parents are happy their identity is hidden.

    Is the desire (or even the demand) of the adopted child to know who his/her biological parents indicative of much of what ails our society today. What I mean is the adopted feel that they have the right to know who their birth parents were regardless of what the bp wanted or what it might do to them if they were exposed. Seems pretty selfish and disrespectful behaviour by the children. "who cares what my birth parents want, I have a right to know!!". I havent seen the right to know your birth parents documented anywhere.

    Some children today are all about me me me. It's what they want that is most important regardless of how it affects others. They have little respect for their parents or any elder and think they have a right to something because they want it. Seems like a similar position from those adoptees. We want the info because we want it. Who cares what our parents wanted. Seems to be very disrespectful of the parents.

    Just seems to me that because you can find out something doesnt mean you should. One can think that the bp's likely had a good reason(at least at the time) to give up their kids for adoption. All the folks I have known who have done this (granted there are only a few) did so to offer a better life for their child. That seems like an ultimate sacrfice in the name of love for the child to me and a totally selfless act. I realize that is not always the case but play along ok.

    Again where is is written that the adopted have the right to know who conceived them? Wanting something, no matter how badly, doesnt make it a right.

    Just an observation. Flame away.
    “There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order.”
    — Ed Howdershelt
    "A government big enough to give you everything you want, is big enough to take away everything you have."- Thomas Jefferson
  5.    #85  
    Quote Originally Posted by ToolkiT
    Question for shopharim:
    Do you think seatbelt are a bad thing too? after all if we all drive by the rules we would not have accidents either?
    Interesting aside. But sense you've brought up one my pet peeves, I'll accomodate. I think seat belts are great. I think laws requiring their use are abuse of power. I think laws requiring insurance is also abuse of power. People should be responsible for their actions. If they take on the risk of driving, they should be prepared to address the liability of doing so. Insurance is a great way to do that. But, if I have the resources to handle the liability on my own, why should I be compelled to pay another funding source. :soap box put away:
    Quote Originally Posted by ToolkiT

    Human nature has a great sexdrive especially in our teens. That is the way we are build.
    So either we get married say between 16 and 21 or we go against our nature and if you are religious God made us so we go against the way god made us?
    I cannot see the logic in that point..
    You make a great point. The logic that you cannot see is hidden by the assumptions you have made about "reality."

    Consider, it is a fairly "recent" concept of delaying marriage until later in life. Marriage around the ages of 16-21 would be in perfect harmony with nature. That would mean people are marrying and engaging in sex right at the point of greatest fertility.

    Hey, wait! What a coincidence. The sex drive is strongest at times of fertility. Imagine that.

    While there are certainly exceptions, the practice of delaying marriage until later in life may be part of why so much medical assistance is needed with conception and childbirth. When women wait until their 30's and 40's to have children, they have waited until their systems are on the decline (especially if those carry & delivery functions were being suppressed desipte exercising the conceiving functions).
    Quote Originally Posted by ToolkiT
    Yes abstinance would work best... if you ignore nature..
    Actually, abstinence works best when you observe nature.
    Quote Originally Posted by ToolkiT
    Since's I 'm a realist I like to face the facts and limit problems..
    If The facts are, we have failed our children in teaching them that pleasure is the highest priority. We have given them all sorts of remedies for problems they should not even have to face. We have seen the failure of the sexual revolution, yet we ask the next generation to continue it, just be more careful than we were.

    Ask any plumber: You can keep replacing the bucket every time it gets full if you want, but if you want really limit water damage, you fix the leak.

    Sexual promiscuity is a leak. Perhaps it is even a full fledge flood. And our children are being swept up into it; drowning in it. Sure, throw a life preserver to those who are already being swept away. But don't throw more children into the deluge.
  6. #86  
    Woof, I don't know the specifics of other states, but in Ohio, adoption records were open until 1964. An ADOPTIVE parent started the legal process that finally closed adoption records. This same adoptive parent has now joined the effort to reverse the law.


    http://bastards.org/bb/9.Privacy.html
  7. #87  
    Quote Originally Posted by shopharim
    Interesting aside. But sense you've brought up one my pet peeves, I'll accomodate. I think seat belts are great. I think laws requiring their use are abuse of power. I think laws requiring insurance is also abuse of power. People should be responsible for their actions. If they take on the risk of driving, they should be prepared to address the liability of doing so. Insurance is a great way to do that. But, if I have the resources to handle the liability on my own, why should I be compelled to pay another funding source. :soap box put away:You make a great point. The logic that you cannot see is hidden by the assumptions you have made about "reality."

    Consider, it is a fairly "recent" concept of delaying marriage until later in life. Marriage around the ages of 16-21 would be in perfect harmony with nature. That would mean people are marrying and engaging in sex right at the point of greatest fertility.

    Hey, wait! What a coincidence. The sex drive is strongest at times of fertility. Imagine that.

    While there are certainly exceptions, the practice of delaying marriage until later in life may be part of why so much medical assistance is needed with conception and childbirth. When women wait until their 30's and 40's to have children, they have waited until their systems are on the decline (especially if those carry & delivery functions were being suppressed desipte exercising the conceiving functions). Actually, abstinence works best when you observe nature.If The facts are, we have failed our children in teaching them that pleasure is the highest priority. We have given them all sorts of remedies for problems they should not even have to face. We have seen the failure of the sexual revolution, yet we ask the next generation to continue it, just be more careful than we were.

    Ask any plumber: You can keep replacing the bucket every time it gets full if you want, but if you want really limit water damage, you fix the leak.

    Sexual promiscuity is a leak. Perhaps it is even a full fledge flood. And our children are being swept up into it; drowning in it. Sure, throw a life preserver to those who are already being swept away. But don't throw more children into the deluge.

    Nicely put. I very much enjoy your posts Shoparim. One of these days I'll order your cd and see if you play as well as you post.
    “There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order.”
    — Ed Howdershelt
    "A government big enough to give you everything you want, is big enough to take away everything you have."- Thomas Jefferson
  8. #88  
    Quote Originally Posted by lb505
    Woof, I don't know the specifics of other states, but in Ohio, adoption records were open until 1964. An ADOPTIVE parent started the legal process that finally closed adoption records. This same adoptive parent has now joined the effort to reverse the law.
    Laurie, I dont know the specifics in ANY state but that was not the point.

    My observation was that adoptees are being awfully selfish and not respecting the wishes of their parents. A common theme in society today.
    “There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order.”
    — Ed Howdershelt
    "A government big enough to give you everything you want, is big enough to take away everything you have."- Thomas Jefferson
  9.    #89  
    Quote Originally Posted by Woof
    ...Just an observation. Flame away.
    No flames from me. Just another observation: the child's medical history is a function of the birth parents'
  10.    #90  
    Quote Originally Posted by Woof
    Nicely put. I very much enjoy your posts Shoparim. One of these days I'll order your cd and see if you play as well as you post.
    lol

    Shameless plug
  11. #91  
    Quote Originally Posted by shopharim
    No flames from me. Just another observation: the child's medical history is a function of the birth parents'

    Good point. Medical history could be made accessible without revealing the parent identity.
    “There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order.”
    — Ed Howdershelt
    "A government big enough to give you everything you want, is big enough to take away everything you have."- Thomas Jefferson
  12. #92  
    Quote Originally Posted by Woof
    Laurie, I dont know the specifics in ANY state but that was not the point.

    My observation was that adoptees are being awfully selfish and not respecting the wishes of their parents. A common theme in society today.
    Wishes of which parents? A or B? You are making a huge assumption that birthparents want to remain confidential. So many BM's were lied to and told that their children would have access to their original birth certificates when they turned 18.
  13. #93  
    Quote Originally Posted by lb505
    Wishes of which parents? A or B? You are making a huge assumption that birthparents want to remain confidential. So many BM's were lied to and told that their children would have access to their original birth certificates when they turned 18.
    A or B? C'mon we're talking birth parents here and you know it. Besides if the adoptee is 18 what difference does it make whether the adoptive parents want them to find out. I would surmise that most would have no issue. Again though we are going back to a lack of respect for the parents in either case. I would be more interested in the adoptees motivation than anything.

    Why do they want to find their bp? Again motive should have some bearing on the access. And are we talking open access to adoptees only or open access as in on the public record? If only the first why should an adoptees right to know who begat who be anymore important than the average citizen? If I want to know who you BM was should I be able to find out just the same as you? Or are we talking open records only open to a select group. Seems that is what is there now. You just want to maybe open them a bit more but not all the way?
    “There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order.”
    — Ed Howdershelt
    "A government big enough to give you everything you want, is big enough to take away everything you have."- Thomas Jefferson
  14. #94  
    Quote Originally Posted by lb505
    Wishes of which parents? A or B? You are making a huge assumption that birthparents want to remain confidential. So many BM's were lied to and told that their children would have access to their original birth certificates when they turned 18.

    You are joking right? You actually think that a Birth parent who gives up their rights legally as a parent, should be allowed to access the child records 18 years after they gave the child up for adoption??

    I know that I read that wrong!
  15. #95  
    Quote Originally Posted by Woof
    This will likely get me flamed but reading this and looking at the website mentioned above leads me to this thought. I am not stating an opinion on open records either way. This is just observation.

    If the birth parents wanted to be known wouldnt they make it so? I know some states have laws and such but I am sure that the parents are happy their identity is hidden.

    Is the desire (or even the demand) of the adopted child to know who his/her biological parents indicative of much of what ails our society today. What I mean is the adopted feel that they have the right to know who their birth parents were regardless of what the bp wanted or what it might do to them if they were exposed. Seems pretty selfish and disrespectful behaviour by the children. "who cares what my birth parents want, I have a right to know!!". I havent seen the right to know your birth parents documented anywhere.

    Some children today are all about me me me. It's what they want that is most important regardless of how it affects others. They have little respect for their parents or any elder and think they have a right to something because they want it. Seems like a similar position from those adoptees. We want the info because we want it. Who cares what our parents wanted. Seems to be very disrespectful of the parents.

    Just seems to me that because you can find out something doesnt mean you should. One can think that the bp's likely had a good reason(at least at the time) to give up their kids for adoption. All the folks I have known who have done this (granted there are only a few) did so to offer a better life for their child. That seems like an ultimate sacrfice in the name of love for the child to me and a totally selfless act. I realize that is not always the case but play along ok.

    Again where is is written that the adopted have the right to know who conceived them? Wanting something, no matter how badly, doesnt make it a right.

    Just an observation. Flame away.

    Ok here is my flame.... AMEN
  16. #96  
    When it comes to access of Birth records. Up until the age of 18 it is MY choice if I want my child to have access to those records. If I believe that my child is mature enough and has a real desire to know where they physically came from, then I will make that choice with my wife and them when the time comes.

    If ANY of the birth donors tries to make contact with my child before the age of 18, then they wil be stopped at all costs. Legally etc.

    It is NOT up to them if they should be in contact with my child. It is up to the childs parents and them. In my case, it is up to My wife, ME and MY child. Not the birth parents who gave up all their rights!
    Last edited by DeathtoToasters; 08/17/2005 at 12:56 PM.
  17. #97  
    Quote Originally Posted by DeathtoToasters
    Ok here is my flame.... AMEN
    If only all the flames I got were this nice.
    “There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order.”
    — Ed Howdershelt
    "A government big enough to give you everything you want, is big enough to take away everything you have."- Thomas Jefferson
  18. #98  
    Quote Originally Posted by DeathtoToasters
    When it comes to access of Birth records. Up until the age of 18 it is MY choice if I want my child to have access to those records. If I believe that my child is mature enough and has a real desire to know where they physically came from, then I will make that choice with my wife and them when the time comes.

    If ANY of the birth donors tries to make contact with my child before the age of 18, then they wil be stopped at all costs. Legally etc.

    It is NOT up to them if they should be in contact with my child. It is up to the childs parents and them. In my case, it is up to My wife, ME and MY child. Not the birth parents who gave up all their rights!
    If you read the ******* Nation website, you would have seen it refers to adult adoptees only.
  19. #99  
    Quote Originally Posted by DeathtoToasters
    You are joking right? You actually think that a Birth parent who gives up their rights legally as a parent, should be allowed to access the child records 18 years after they gave the child up for adoption??

    I know that I read that wrong!
    Yes, wrong. The adult adoptee would be able to access his or her original birth certificate.
  20. #100  
    Quote Originally Posted by Woof
    A or B? C'mon we're talking birth parents here and you know it. Besides if the adoptee is 18 what difference does it make whether the adoptive parents want them to find out. I would surmise that most would have no issue. Again though we are going back to a lack of respect for the parents in either case. I would be more interested in the adoptees motivation than anything.

    Why do they want to find their bp? Again motive should have some bearing on the access. And are we talking open access to adoptees only or open access as in on the public record? If only the first why should an adoptees right to know who begat who be anymore important than the average citizen? If I want to know who you BM was should I be able to find out just the same as you? Or are we talking open records only open to a select group. Seems that is what is there now. You just want to maybe open them a bit more but not all the way?
    Access to the same unaltered, unamended birth certificate, the same as most other people in the US. Again, this is not about searching. I know who my BM is. So if you are asking why would I want my original unamended bc, the answer is because I think it is my right to have the legal documents pertaining to my birth. If you are asking why adoptees search, that is a whole other can of worms and I think, probably very personal for each adoptee.
Page 5 of 6 FirstFirst 123456 LastLast

Posting Permissions