An Honest Look at Adoption

abortion, adoption, birth, mother, prochoice, prolife,
Look, I'm not saying adoption is a bad thing. I think it's a good thing. It's certainly a wonderful thing for people who can't have children and desperately want them. But I have never, ever, seen anything written from the point of view of the birth mother (who in this case had previously had an abortion). Now I have.

****Warning****

The post is a tough read. It's not freakin' Juno. It made me very sad, and very angry. Maybe, just maybe, before we suggest adoption as the panacea to unwanted pregnancies, we need to address the very real concerns brought up by a very real birth mother.

Just a few highlights for those who don't like to click.

Adoption fucked up my head far worse than abortion. I've googled over the years about the psychological aftereffects of giving up a baby, and what little I found is astonishing. Depression and suicide rates ridiculously high, comparable to PTSD - and beyond a shadow of a doubt, there is no way you can cook any post-abortion trauma study to come anywhere near post-adoption trauma levels. Strange how peer-reviewed studies on this are damn near non-existent; strange how nobody mentions any of this when it's not just your mind on the line, but also that of your kid or kids (more on that later). Strange how this is never on the radar when these stupid obstructionist anti-abortion rules are proposed by retrofuckwits.

. . .

Emotional fallout only matters to [pro lifers] as a political talking point, in a conversation that includes space only for what is convenient to their preexisting narratives. There's no space to talk about, for example, how, to give a baby up for adoption, you've got to get the father's signature on the papers, or else face legal hell (now, or later). I was raped, by a so-called friend; I had to go through legal hell to get a signature anyway. It was pretty damn adversarial.

. . .

To wind this down: one size fits all doesn't apply to adoption, any more than it does to abortion. If there's going to be discussion about mental issues arising from abortion, then there had damn well better start being just as much - if not more - discussion about mental issues arising from adoption. I cannot say that I'd be surprised to find out that any concern on the part of pro-lifers about birth mothers ended the second she signed the papers; I will scream "Hypocrisy!" as loud as I can if they try to pass off their latest brainfarts as such. You've seen this already: they also argue about the sanctity of a fetus' life, but I see no legislation addressing the quality of life of adoptees.

None of which matters to the kind of people who picket clinics. Not me, not the kid, nothing. All they care about is whether or not they win.

Truer words were never spoken.

The Story of the Century

I love it when, at the beginning of a year, decade or century, somebody declares something "the story of the year/decade/century." Every January, some schlockfest of a movie declares itself the "movie of the year." Yeah, it's January. There's been like one other movie. Calm down.

This leads us to Janet Porters latest foray into unreality, Make the media cover the story of the century. (Yeah, the picture is entirely random, I just like it.)

One of the most often asked questions regarding whether or not Barack Obama meets the constitutional requirements for the office of president is: "Why hasn't the 'mainstream' media covered this?" Good question. I bet that's not the most asked question. I bet the most asked question is "Are you fucking nuts?", or for the more polite "What is the matter with you?" or "Do you need your Thorazine refilled?" Those have to be the top 3 questions. "Why hasn't the 'mainstream' media covered this?" is probably the 53rd most asked question.

Also, why is "mainstream" in quotes? It's the mainstream media or it's not. Maybe I should send Ms. Porter to a grammar website.

Well, one thing we found out in the last election is there isn't anything "mainstream" about the "mainstream" media. There is no longer any doubt about their pro-Obama bias – even the Washington Post came out and admitted it.

All right, let's examine what "mainstream" means. The definition of "mainstream" is the principal or dominant course, tendency, or trend. Obama received 53% of the popular vote. Therefore, the principal or dominant court, tendency or trend was to support Obama. And, the Washington Post did not admit a pro-Obama bias- it's the word "bias" that's important in that sentence- they came out in support of a candidate. Newspapers do that all the time. It's not bias. And, had the Washington Post come out in support of McCain, you know Ms. Porter would not be all upset about it.

If it weren't for WorldNetDaily, a few radio talk shows and some blogs, we wouldn't even know about the constitutional crisis we're in. The job of the media is not to report every disproven conspiracry theory any idiot can come up with. It is to report actual, provable news. Look what happened to Rather. He did what Ms. Porter is doing- latching onto anything negative someone said about a politican he hated- and he got spanked for it. He got spanked because there was no proof and he didn't do enough research.

Interestingly, these are the first things on the chopping block in an unchecked Obama administration. Yes, yes, yes, Obama is going to remove the First Amendment. All by hisself. Even assuming Obama wanted to do that, he couldn't. The President cannot unilaterally change the Constitution. The Constitution can only be changed via an Amendment initiated by Congress or a state, which then has to be ratified (or voted for) by a certain number of states. So, even if the President did try to remove the First Amendment, a majority of USians would have to agree to it. File that under not very fucking likely.

Look, we're not asking for the world here. You don't have to be "asking for the world" to be making an unreasonable request. Neither is the Constitution. Sentence fragment. What isn't the Constitution doing? Do inanimate object actually "do" anything? Guess it depends on what your definition of "is" is. Some pretty basic requirements like being 35 years old, Please, please, please form a complete sentence. Please. having 14 years residency in the United States, and being a natural born citizen. The children of US citizens are US citizens no matter where they are born. Otherwise, the children of diplomats in other countries wouldn't be US citizens. You can see how awkward that would get. When Sen. John McCain was questioned about it, he showed his birth certificate without hesitating. When Barack Obama was asked by courts, including the U.S. Supreme Court, he ducked and hid behind the right to privacy. Even responding to this particular request is giving it a legitimacy it doesn't deserve.

Ironically, when Obama was running for the Illinois Senate, he won by disqualifying every candidate who ran against him in the primary, including a guy who had been through a nasty and salacious divorce. How is that irony? Irony is a technique of indicating, as through character or plot development, an intention or attitude opposite to that which is actually or ostensibly stated Even though he had a small child who could be hurt by the information being made public, a court decided that the public's "right to know" outweighed this poor fella's right to privacy, and he backed out. Obama clings to the "right to privacy" regarding his own qualifications, just not his opponents.

Here's the actual irony: McCain and Palin spent the campaign shouting the Obama (who also has young children) is a MUSLIM!TERRORIST!HE'sBLACK! and Ms. Porter is complaining that Obama questioned an opponents morals? Does Ms. Porter read anything she writes? Remember that old lady telling McCain she was afraid because Obama is an "Arab"? Remember the crowd at Palin's hate rally shouting n***er at a random black cameraman? I do.

The second most-asked question or the 67th most asked question about Obama's citizenship is: "Don't you think someone would have found out the answer to these questions before now?" Also an outstanding question. Is it that hard to write a complete sentence involving a subject and a verb? Phil Berg,

*we interrupt this post for a visit to a previous post*

In 2005 Philip Berg was fined and sanctioned $10,000 for having committed a "laundry list of unethical actions." "Other attorneys should look to Mr. Berg's actions as a blueprint for what not to do when attempting to effectively and honorably perform the duties of the legal profession," Joyner wrote."This court has grown weary of Mr. Berg's continuous and brazen disrespect toward this court and his own clients. Mr. Berg's actions ... are an enormous waste of judicial time and resources that this court cannot, in good conscience, allow to go unpunished." That's the man leading the charge against Obama.

*resume regularly scheduled blogging*

whose case is now before the U.S. Supreme Court, not only filed suit in August but also copied Democratic Party Chairman Howard Dean on the matter before Obama was chosen as the nominee. I am a legal secretary, and I can tell you that as long as I have the filing fees and the time, I can file any lawsuit I want, against anyone I want, and copy anyone I want. I would have thought that something as important as whether a potential nominee is qualified to serve in office might be worth a question or two prior to the party's selection. Sure, if the information were true or relevant. But that information was ignored, and now they're just hoping it will all go away. I'm hoping Ms. Porter will go away. If wishes were dollars . . .

It won't. Not until Obama comes forward with the proof that the American people want and the Constitution demand. The Constitution demands, with an "s", the Constitution being a singular noun. Yeesh!

But what can an ordinary citizen do to defend the Constitution? Grab a katana? Instead of sitting on the sidelines wringing our hands, we can do something about it. Funny, that's not how I spend my time. If the "news" channels won't cover what may be the biggest story of our lifetime, I say, let's buy it. Ms. Porter wants to buy what? Our lifetime? The biggest story? When you use a pronoun such as "it", the pronoun refers to the last appropriate noun mentioned. In the case, "it" would refer either to "lifetime" or "story". Ms. Porter wants to buy a story? Hmmmm. Help put this television ad on the air – watch it at obamaforgery.com: Tell me what it's like, I don't get sound on my computer at work.

Heard the rumors about Barack Obama's citizenship? Sure, I chose not to believe what every nutbag in the religious rights says.
These are the facts: only if you define "facts" as "whatever I happen to say"
The Constitution requires the president to be a natural born citizen. true
Obama's grandmother said she there when Barack was born in Kenya. can we leave the woman alone? I can't find anything on this other than on wnd and related fundysites.
Obama refuses to release his original birth certificate. i wouldn't respond to this, either.
Instead of a birth certificate, Obama's campaign posted a certification given to those born abroad.
Experts have called even that document an "obvious forgery." experts identified by username!
Obama attended school in Indonesia as Barry Soetoro, when only Indonesian citizens were permitted to attend. *sigh* Mr. Soetoro was a citizen, so his stepson was allowed to attend. We allow the same thing in the US. Also, I can call myself by any name I want, that doesn't make it my legal name.
Obama's school records list his father as Lolo Soetoro and Obama's citizenship as Indonesian. Indonesian school records now trump the Constitution? That's an unfortunate argument to make. What she's really getting at is that Obama is MUSLIM!TERRORIST!HE's BLACK!
Obama traveled to Pakistan in 1981 when it was illegal to enter as a U.S. citizen. US Citizens were never banned from entering Pakistan. What Ms. Porter is referring to is a "travel advisory". The US issues travel advisories based on current diplomatic relationships and recent violent events. Right now, it is legal to US citizens to travel to India. Given the recent tragedies in Mumbai, it is inadvisable.
Sixteen lawsuits in 12 states and two cases before the Supreme Court now challenge Obama's citizenship. Again, any idiot can file any lawsuit, regardless of merit.
Fact: Our Constitution still matters. That is a fact.
www.obamaforgery.com

Illuminati Pictures, an extreme right wing video production company who produced the video of expert Ron Polarik, produced this ad that raises as many of the facts regarding Obama's citizenship as one can fit in 60 seconds. Let's let get a fucking thesaurus, bitch: allow. Let's allow. America hear them and add their voice VOICES to the 120,000 out of the almost 302,000,000 people in the US who signed the WND petition in the last few days.

Go to www. Faith2Action.org and watch the ad. Any Web donation to Faith2Action from now until Dec. 15 will go directly toward airtime to place this ad on television. How much is it going to take? Well, $12,000 buys a national 60-second ad on Fox News between 5 and 6 p.m. I say let's buy a few of those and publicize it so the rest of the world finally hears about the constitutional crisis we're in. Then, the Bill O'Reillys, Sean Hannitys and Rush Limbaughs may decide to cover the story of the century. Oh, now I understand the quotes around mainstream. She can't even get O'Reilly, Hannity and Limbaugh to cover this? Ms. Porter is full of fail.