Home Latest features Archive of source material Links to others
Biblical America:
the social movement that seeks to use the Bible as the sole basis of all governance and social interaction.

a resource for all who work to monitor and counter the Biblical America movement.

No white flags:
Individually or socially, never give in to, nor accomodate, this movement's extremist demands.

Search this site

Also from the creators of barf.org:

Acquire the Evidence - on Ron Luce and Teen Mania Ministries ("Battle Cry" Campaign)

The Answer is No - Answering Operation Save America in Columbus, Ohio - July 2004

Sabina's Diary at Daily Kos

Mike's Diary at Daily Kos

Articulations - wrapping words around that gut feeling (Mike and Sabina's Weblog)

BoardRoom/Soapbox Archive


Adoption for church growth 1
By Lauren Sabina Kneisly

Time: Sat, 03-Apr-1999 18:31:47 GMT     

:I personally know couples that are trying very
:hard to adopt or have a child on their own that
:would gladly help these children both before and
:after the birth of a child.  How you can ascribe
:some sort of evil intent to their actions is
:beyond my thinking.  Perhaps you can explain this.

Ok, yeah, my adoptive parents were in a similar
situation, that doesn't mean stealing someone
else's child is the answer. (Consent is often
absent, even where forms are signed. More to the
point: is it really possible to give informed
consent to losing a <living, breathing, history
creating> child?) What your analysis lacks is any
understanding of the practical applications of the
adoption industry as it functions. Adoption sounds
great in a vacuum; trying to make it work in
reality is much more tricky, sort of like

Now here's the kicker: you say "would gladly help
these children both before and after the birth of
a child". So you're telling me, these couples you
know have already 'supported' this womyn (entered
into a contract?) PRIOR to birth. So you're saying
they've contracted for a fetus who isn't even born

Uh huh. And this relates to consent how exactly?
She's supposedly 'giving consent' before birth, uh
huh. So tell me, after they pay medical expenses,
or whatever their state allows, how does she
change her mind at birth if she chooses?

I suppose adoption being sold to you by your local
pregnancy evangelism ministry sounds great at 5
months. That's well before she's undergone
internment at a maternity camp, been drugged, and
her child whisked away as she still lies, shackled
on the delivery table waiting for the placenta to
come, doped up. Then they tell her she either
signs the release form, or they send her to a
mental hospital - after all, she's acting
hysterical demanding this baby - when before she
was drugged she had already said she wanted to
'relinquish'. "Just sign here honey." (One of many
many many true stories.) How can you contract on a
fetus not yet born? What if she miscarries?

And what about those so called medical expenses,
or whatever her particular state allows? This is
baby buying, pure and simple, only the pregnant
womyn doesn't see the cash, the doctors do, the
adoption agency does, hell even the social workers
who do home studies do. But what does the pregnant
womyn get? A lifetime a wondering where her child
is. The agony of trying to find the child, only to
be legally barred. How humane.

Adoption in this system for movement growth,
aside from being a crime against humanity, for
both the adopted person (not adopted child; we do
grow up, you know), and the mother, can be
grueling for the adoptive parents too. Due to the
lack of real information and the lack of
accountability for the adoption industry as a
whole they may find themselves screwed.  Try
making decisions over illnesses for your adopted
child with no medical history. What recourse do
adoptive parents have when the adoption agency
tells you it's a healthy infant and then they
find out it has severe retardation? Adoptive
parents are being fucked too. Basically, very few
in the adoption triad 'win'.

As for these billions and billions of waiting
couples, you're lumping all kinds of adoptions
together; are you demanding kids be found for
Queer families who wish to adopt? No, I don't
think so, but they are some of these who wait, and
are most disparaged by the courts. So are you then
saying you demand children for those who meet
certain (what, biblical?) standards of parenting,
tests for office?

Some wait on international adoptions, often
because they 'never want the birthmother showing
up on their doorstep'. Which is interesting isn't
it? Wanting a child, but never wanting anyone to
EVER be able to show up saying the child was
stolen; they wait demanding a situation with an
absolute lack of accountabilty, fuck the

You've also lumped together those who wait in
public agencies for kids comming through the
foster system, and those who wait on Christian
adoption agencies, who get the funnel results of
CPICs (Coercive Pregnancy Indoctrination Centers,
you know 'Care-net', 'Heartbeat Intl', etc). These
are two completely separate (but not equal)

If these couples you speak of are waiting on kids
coming from CPICs, as it sounds like from your
description of basically adopting before birth,
then yeah they may have to wait awhile, only so
many womyn fall for the CPIC adoption pitch and
only those good christians who have signed the
christian adoption agency's statement of faith get
to adopt. How much you wanta bet there are lots of
christian couples waiting for every one of those?

What about the biblical american movements
generated demand for more children/larger
families/adoption available newborns? Just look at
Paul Marx of Human Life International's booklet on
10 reasons you should have one more
child. Adoption and high birthrate as a church
growth strategy. Lovely. And you wonder why we
don't like you folk much.

Further, nowhere does it say that everyone who
wants to parent may do so, even at anothers
expense! Parenting, while a social norm, is not
inevitable, and -SOME- people might be better off
refocusing their energy on other parts of their
lives instead of forever mourning their lack of
children. The entire notion of 'children to carry
on the family line' completely disregards the
notion of children as smaller humans with their
own wants and desires. Then again, it's clear from
your above ' help these children' that small
people are to be acted upon 'for their own good'.

I don't consider a 14 year old a child. Nor do I
consider adoption 'help'. As usual, you've
determined your defintion of 'help' should be the


Home · About Us · Features · Archive · Links · Contact
© 1997-2006 by the authors.