Watching The Watchers!
Caleigh Brooks
Syndicate
Share
Bloggernity
"Blog Rankings" search engine
Amidalla
Feeds4all
CALEIGHBROOKSWATCHINGTHEWATCHERS.COM
Let's Find Out About Your Neighbors!
* Welcome Fellow Intellectuals in the United States & Around the World!
Once, and for all, let's get educated about this so there won't be so much stupidity bandied about all over the place by UNknowledgeable people! Ok? Please click on the following link - you'll be so much wiser! You'll be way ahead of the game! Yeaaah!
Thank You
to
the Author of the above Article - Link
and
the Producer of the Website on which the Article is published!
Sinners
*Welcome Fellow Intellectuals in the United States & Around the World!
* t h e V i d e o
T H E B E S T K E P T S E C R E T
is
always
about
sex!
Being a minority
~ the underdog ~
is
serious business!
It's no joke!
T H E B E S T K E P T S E C R E T
is
always
about
sex!
Being a minority
~ the underdog ~
is
serious business!
It's no joke!
Stay informed! You never know when Life [ your shameless neighbor ] is going to pounce on you! Here is one example of how the vulnerable were treated in the 20th century all over the world simply because they were single [ unmarried ]. The film is disgusting and criminal! It takes you back in time - not too far back! Our analysis of the film follows. Please click on the word, "Sinners," below to get an eyeful. Be sure to click on the square icon in the lower right side to see the FULL screen. Enjoy!
"Sinners" * the Video takes you back to the 1960s in the United States and all over the world wherever the pope and his cronies ruled with a mighty fist! They were misogynists of the highest order! During the 1960s - and the decades before and after the 60s - millions of single moms in the United States lost infants to adoption - the ONLY REASON these single moms lost their healthy Caucasian newborn infants is because they were UNMARRIED - FALLEN women! FALLEN MEANS THEY WERE SINNERS! The exact number is illusive but statisticians have concluded that as high as 6 million to 8 million American children were lost in the 20th century to what investigators and researchers term as an experiment! You won't believe it! It's all true! We implore you - please read the WHOLE long post below! And try to see the complete * Video
- T H A N K Y O U ! ! ! for allowing us to share our thoughts with you today! We are humbled!
- We know our readers are busy people; hence, we apologize for the length of some of the posts in this blogcast but - well, we want you to see "the whole picture." Please read our commentary in several sittings at your leisure, if it suits you best. W E N E E D Y O U ! ! ! to be informed. Please come back often!
- TOPICS AT A GLANCE at the end of this post is a summary of the subject matter of this post for your convenience. Hope it's helpful!
- A single pregnant mom in * the Video is shown SMOKING a cigarette. In the 1960s, it wasn't known yet that smoking is bad for one's health. Puffing on cigarettes was fashionable then. Smoking is yet another product of our idiotic patriarchal past!
- We view the following clarification so important that we have addressed it here in the beginning of this commentary: When we use the terms, ADOPTION INDUSTRY, or ADOPTION TITANS, in this blogcast, we include infertile couples (since they are the demand in the adoption industry), prospective adoptive parents, adoptive parents, and adoptive relatives, adoption agencies, adoption attorneys, adoption workers, social workers... EVERYONE and ANYONE who conspires to take possession of children that don't belong to them!
- Mindbogglingly, so-called mental health professionals today are still not at all educated about the institution of adoption! They just casually think adoption is a great way to create a family for those who are unable to procreate - like going to the supermarket! By way of this commentary and * the Video, we hope to dispel the myth - the lie - the con! We are the voice of the underdog! Feel free to direct mental health professionals, priests, teachers... to this entry. You'll be doing them a favor, a great service! They will thank you for it. They're supposed to have their collective pulse on the Zeitgeist!
- Speaking of mental health professionals... Not all such "homes for unwed mothers" that are depicted in * the Video were run by nuns. To make a long story short - during the early 20th century across the United States, benevolent Christian women operated these "homes for unwed mothers" where unmarried moms would learn how to raise their children and support themselves despite the stigma of illegitimate birth. After World War II, however, social workers saw their chance to make social work a "true" profession and leapt at it! During this dark period of history, social workers pushed out the charity-driven amateurs and these maternity "homes" then became warehouses for young pregnant women and girls. These social workers - the adoption industry - decided it is best to separate the single mother from her child. Social workers convinced the public that THEY are the true "experts in single parenthood."
- The Salvation Army, the National Florence Crittenton Mission/Homes, St. Vincent dePaul Homes for Unwed Mothers { Catholic Charities } and other such reproductive detention centers have been in the business of shamelessly separating families exactly like you see in * the Video. We see that the National Florence Crittenton Home still advertises their wares on their website today, and Catholic Charities may still be in the business in 2010! Beware!
At " Watching The Watchers," we were debating whether to publish this entry under the category in the sidebar of this blogcast, "Violence Against Women" or "Is Adoption Humane?" or "Adoption: The Ultimate Violence!" all of which describe the content of this entry to the hilt! We decided to begin a special category, "Adoption: The Violent Industry!" Particularly abhorrent and flagrant in * the Video is the extent to which the single mom of the not too distant past was punished while the single dad received no repercussions whatsoever - not even a slap on the wrist or a slap across the face.
We thank the perspicacious producers of * the Video, entitled, "Sinners" - BBC Northern Ireland and Parallel Film Productions LTD. Productions - who have absolutely and skillfully and brilliantly captured the aura of the times that we are attempting to describe much better than we are able to describe the barbaric experience of "the single mom of the recent past" by way of the written word. As with anything else in Life, you had to be there, as they say. You be the judge. (We view our use of the adjective, barbaric, in the same breath as "adoption industry" to be an insult to barbarians and we apologize to the barbarians of the world because the experience of the single mom has been worse than barbaric!)
In short, to comply with SOCIETAL MORES (rules), single moms of the past were forced to hide in Homes For Unwed Mothers where they left their newborn infants alone on the adoption block to the highest bidder. After living within the comforting waters of Mommy's tummy for 9 months, these babies were left alone with strangers! (Today some single moms still hide in these "homes.") They did this to protect themselves and their families from ostracism by their society (ostracism by their cheap, low-grade, neighbors - you know who you are). Single moms were forced to sacrifice their children because of the shame, stigma, the disgrace, the AUDACITY of giving birth to one's own offspring while UNmarried. Our goal is to have women, and men, think for themselves and not give a hoot what their low-grade neighbors may think! It's a big world our there! You don't need them! Be smart!
* Despite our honorable, larger-than-Life forefathers of the 18th century guaranteeing in the United States Constitution the right of every parent, single and married, to parent his, or her, own child, the majority in our society decided to ban together and make up its own rules in the 20th century! In other words, your small, conniving, jealous, dishonorable neighbors made up their own rules about single parenthood. This overriding of the Constitution shows just how powerful societal mores can be!
* Our forefathers even went as far as to guarantee that the government will financially help single and married parents who cannot afford to raise their children!
From where did the disconnect between the U.S. Constitution and societal mores sprout? Only since the mid-20th century has there been cyclopean pressure on single parents to give their children for adoption! What has been the source of this haughty pressure? Well, of course - MONEY! and JEALOUSY! and a sense of ENTITLEMENT! (Infertile couples believe, "Hey, we're entitled to a child like everybody else!")
(This whole entry is the answer to the aforementioned question.)
Complete families have been (and still are today) coerced and brainwashed into leaving their illegitimate infants (Please see: Notes #2) for infertile but married strangers who follow societal rules to scoop up. This expiation or remedy or atonement was expected of single parents of the 20th century. When you think about it - the whole dance of married strangers with fertility issues being in "the private sexual space of single parents where they don't belong" reeks of incestuousness of the highest order - this incest would fuel the disgraceful adoption industry of the 20th century!
Single moms were forced to hide just like homosexuals of the past were forced to hide, and illegitimate was the offensive and degrading term used to stigmatize the innocent baby of the single mom who was quickly labeled a slut. The adjective was just another avenue with which to extract the child. To seal the deal! To seal the coffins of single moms who have sinned! To make sure the single mom doesn't rear her ugly little head in the future and to make sure the adoptive parents live in peace and harmony, "Let us totally annihilate the psyche of the single mom so she doesn't come back when the pain gets to be too much to bear," was the thinking! Instead of a literal branding iron, illegitimate was the adjective used to brand the innocent gifts that God - Universe brought forth from the bosom of single moms - yet another concept we can thank our idiotic patriarchs for!
During the mid - 20th century, Homes For Unwed Mothers sprouted up in the United States and all over the globe - not exclusively but mostly wherever the pope and/or Christianity ruled. Inside, and outside, these "homes," vulnerable pregnant women and girls, and their complete vulnerable families, were brainwashed out of their healthy, Caucasian, infants by various means of indoctrination to fuel the multi-billion dollar adoption industry. Researchers have called this separation of families an experiment - a way to legitimize the job of the social worker. Besides the legitimization of the profession of social work, we call the adoption process a distribution of wealth, the wealth being the Caucasian infants.
An adoption execution can cost anywhere from $30,000 to $50,000!!!The law of supply and demand superlatively and quite simply illustrates the execution of adoption. Simply put ~ a booming market existed (and still exists today) and greedy and unscrupulous, entrepreneurs leapt at the opportunity. There was a demand (infertile couples) for a product (healthy Caucasian babies) and tragically the supply was finagled from vulnerable single moms who had no troglodytes to protect them - single moms were elected to pay the ultimate price! The brainwashing techniques by which scheming marketeers extracted infants was stigma, shame, disgrace, the threat of exile, ostracism.... We're tellin' you - our slimy entrepreneurs are slick! The scheme of the adoption industry (remember - infertile couples are the demand in the adoption industry) went something like this, "...Hmmm, let's make single motherhood a disgrace and set up Homes For Unwed Mothers where single moms will be forced to hide to protect their families from exile and 'voila' we've got ourselves an industry... adoption attorneys, adoption agencies, social workers... yeah, we can get rich! And we can use religion to make it all look legal... on the up and up! Who could object to that? Besides - the sluts can always have more kids! What's the harm!? Infertile couples are ENTITLED to raise a family, too! Let's spread the wealth! What's the big deal? They have to learn to follow the rules! They're sinners!"
A few Homes For Unwed Mothers still brazenly and arrogantly exist; albeit, the indoctrination, the brainwashing, the grooming, is much more subtle befitting the times that we live in since shame and stigma... no longer work quite so well. Although, in religious circles, these brainwashing techniques by which to extract children from the vulnerable still work quite nicely. Today slick, shameless, titans advertise on the Internet, "...Pregnant? If you're alone with your secret, we can help...."
In 2010 C.E., procuring infants for infertile couples to adopt is tougher so the adoption industry has conjured up new ways of separating families. There are many new tricks of the { adoption } trade. The following are only 8 new flagrant brainwashing techniques currently used to extricate children from the vulnerable:
Open adoption is supposed to give the natural mom some contact with her child, like pictures, cards, letters, or a yearly visit, as her child grows but the law does not bind adoptive parents to any such farce of a contract. Adoptive parents are allowed to skip town at any time and not let the natural mom know where they've skedaddled with her child. The law protects the adoptive parents! Open adoption is like making an agreement with a handshake.
"Trade ya' - a couple a' pictures a year for your healthy, White, infant!"
The single mom today is given a supposed "choice" of open adoption vs closed adoption but, more often than not, there is a change of heart in midstream for adoptive parents in an open adoption. As these strangers bond with the child that belongs to another, suddenly open adoption is not quite as appealing as before when they would do and say anything to obtain a child.
We don't mind people invoking the name of God during a conversation - even a few times is ok - but every other word gets to be annoying and disrespectful to the listener. It's as if the speaker is attempting to convince the listener that by saying God's name numerous times during a conversation, the listener will be thoroughly convinced that God loves the speaker best. The listener is supposed to rest assured that the speaker is a good person just because he, or she, has mentioned God's name umpteen times. It's immature, childish, of the speaker and insulting to the listener. How often have our eyes glazed over listening to such a speaker? Very often!
* It's usually only one speaker in a conversation that has the pomposity to invoke God's name continually. How comedical would the scenario be with both speakers or many speakers invoking God's name in a conversation at the same time? Shouldn't that be reserved for religion class in school? Usually, it's one kind and generous listener who, with glazed-over eyes, is forced to listen to the overbearing speaker. Don't be so kind all the time, loyal listeners! Take off in midstream! Look at your watch and explain, "Hey! It's been real nice! I gotta' go, now! See ya' later, alligator!"
* The supererogatory use of God's name by weak and brainwashed moms who lose kids to adoption - every other word in a sentence is God's name - borders on "Taking the name of the Lord, thy God, in vain" which, we believe, according to the 2nd Commandment of The 10 Commandments of most religions is something we are commanded not to do. (Please see: Notes #3) Using God's name in vain is a sin according to most religions. God does not need moronic publicity. God has been doing fine without our invoking His name at every turn.
* Besides these brainwashed moms, our political leaders all too often speak, and promote themselves, via the God route. Immature and inadequate "leaders" (underachievers) invoke God's name at every turn, too. We're supposed to be convinced, then, that they're on the straight and narrow. We're supposed to rest assured that they're honorable and trustworthy people. "So, vote for me. God loves me best."
More than likely, we have all spewed one or two profane words in our lifetime even if only under our collective breath. Our illustrious religionists of the past preached that people who are not good at expressing themselves use profanity. We say that people who overly pepper their conversation with God's name are not good at expressing themselves! We assume it's rewarding to blame every move we make on God? We assume it's convenient and comforting to think that we're not responsible for what happens to us in this Life? Don't forget - God always has that reason. We believe this is an irrational way to view Life and God.
At "Watching The Watchers," we love God! Yet, we wouldn't presume to foist our God and religion on you, so please do not foist your religion on us! Keep your private beliefs about your God to yourself during normal conversation about baseball, for instance. The two previous sentences in this paragraph are NOT meant for our loyal readers who Watch The Watchers with us; we totally welcome and encourage our readers to share ALL your beliefs about any and every thing in Life - that's what this venue is for! We learn from each other! WE NEED YOU! to foist your beliefs on us!
Occasionally, or even often, we all tell ourselves positive lies to survive emotional pain and anxiety. These comforting lies are called psychological defense mechanisms which (1) deny, falsify, and distort reality and (2) operate unconsciously so we are not aware of them.
Young moms who succumb to the new trick of open adoption, and adoption, in general, tell themselves positive things to survive the pain. They'll pull up their defense mechanisms to survive the pain and anxiety of creating a child out of wedlock and feeling society's vast pressure to give the child to deserving married strangers who follow the rules; but, with maturity and the wisdom that maturity brings, they will see how they have been taken advantage of - tricked. They will realize that they have been duped. They will realize the enormity of the gifts that they have lost!
* There is no greater gift in Life than the reproduction of oneself - a child! Certainly a piddling job is not greater than the gift of a child! A career is not greater than a child! A house? A car? A college degree? We don't think so! We implore you: you won't try to compare a few college courses to the gift of a child? Will you?
Without summoning their defense mechanisms, moms who lose children to adoptive strangers would be emotionally, and even physically, immobile and couldn't go on with Life. Sometimes, the pain of Life is almost too much to bear. Some defense mechanisms that help us in our time of need are:
* Rationalization
* Repression
* Projection
* Reaction Formation
* Displacement
* Intellectualization
* Suppression
We walk away from the aforementioned 8 NEW BRAINWASHING TECHNIQUES shaking our heads in disbelief and wonderment:
"WHY IS THIS MUCH TIME AND ENERGY NOT SPENT ON KEEPING "THE FAMILY" TOGETHER!?"
For instance, substitute "not read to parent" for "ready to parent," "adoption plan" for "family plan"... Not AS MUCH money in it? Right? We assume there are enough true orphans in the world without extended families to fuel the greed and the sense of entitlement of adopters?
Why don't a few reputable "entrepreneurs" spend a fraction of the time keeping families together!?
We laud the famed and celebrated Cleveland Clinic Hospital in Cleveland, Ohio, for offering parenting classes and support for teen parents, and all parents - classes most of our own parents would have benefited from!
You ask, "Why Caucasian? What about African-American, Chinese... infants?"
Sorry, no adoption market for Black kids in the past. Black single moms and their families were the lucky ones! Their families remained together. Noone wanted to adopt Black kids in the past - or if they did, the patriarchs - leaders - society would not allow adoption across races. Besides that, the White man wanted to keep the Black man down. ( Research supports this theory. ) The White man thought by allowing Blacks to keep their illegitimate kids, the Black man would remain down and out, poor, on welfare, but that's not what happened at all. Black single parents thrived, and continue to thrive, with their families intact. Blacks had the last laugh! We think that after slavery there is just no way that Whitey was taking ( via adoption ) the Black kids, too!
As we have attempted to illustrate, the majority rules - not just in politics! The majority in every society makes the mores/rules that the members of a society will live by. Until recently, an American citizen either followed these societal mores, or rules, or one was simply and casually, even vehemently, ostracized by their simpleton- neighbor. Where does one go after one is exiled from his, or her, society? All victims who have been labeled as unworthy of participating fully in the mainstream of Life, who have been forced to remain in the closet of Life, and who are today inching their way out of the closet, we thank you for your courage and hard work toward dignity and freedom for all! Thank you for paving the way for others!
During our patriarchal past, even single career women who became pregnant lost their infants to adoption just because they were unmarried; these young women certainly earned plenty of money with which to care for their children but the rule is the rule - the societal rule! Keeping their children would have caused them to lose their jobs and landlords would not rent to single moms - and not too long ago, either, a few short decades ago!
More often than not in the past, engaged couples married right after losing a child to adoption; the price of NOT being ostracized by their society, by their goofy neighbors, though, was no illegitimate children allowed - the child of a prospective married couple had to go for adoption! Hard to believe? Right? Well, there's more! Our goofy society even counted backwards 9 months from the birth of a married couple's 1st child to see if the couple had engaged in pre-marital sex! How intrusively incestuous can a society - your neighbor - get!? People should get a Life and stay out of the sexual affairs of their neighbor!
In the past, there was a brave family with self-esteem here and there that kept the child born to a single family member. Sometimes, Grandma or an Aunt would say the illegitimate child is hers and the family was kept together that way. Prior to the 20th century, there was no such entity or institution as adoption! (You won't give the ridiculous example of Moses being adopted by the Pharaoh and therefore taking the children of another is ok! Man, people will stoop to all kinds of trickery! We can safely say we have heard it all!)
Being the underdog is serious business!
In the United States, besides single parents, gays are a minority, too. Gays who have bravely come out of the closet at the wrong time in the 20th century have been killed! Today, we still see the farcical, "Don't ask, don't tell," rule pertaining to homosexuals in the American armed forces. Today, President Ahmadinejad says there are no homosexuals in Iran so we can only assume that any homosexual coming out of the Iranian closet would be jailed or killed.
We don't think vulnerable people realize exactly how SOCIETAL MORES (rules) influence them because the vulnerable are too busy trying to survive and, hence, can be more easily taken advantage of - tricked - when they're not looking! Hold on tight to your dreams! And your kids!
One example of the climate surrounding single moms of the past: In the United States in the year 2000 C.E., a couple friends of "Watching The Watchers" were sitting in the waiting room of a business as a toddler who looked to be of Colombian descent played on the floor. One of them, perhaps, asked the nationality of the cute little boy. "Oh, he's from Peru," the female adult casually and pretty adamantly quipped - there was no doubt in her mind. "Unwed mothers, they hide! The pope runs the country there!" So, everybody knows (and knew in the past) the trick by which babies were, and are, forced from the vulnerable single mom but the single mom! All of the savvy tricksters, including infertile couples, prospective adoptive parents, know (and knew in the past) the various avenues - the brainwashing techniques - used to trick vulnerable families out of their children, and they're obviously ok with it! Hm-hm.
Adoption titans have thought up new nomenclature to help quell the guilt and heart palpitations of infertile couples and adoptive parents throughout the Life of the child they adopt. For instance, the creepy (makes the skin creepy-crawl) and politically-incorrect, demeaning, insulting term, birthmother, allows infertile couples to rationalize (a defense mechanism) in their own minds and convince themselves that it's ok to take the child that is born from the body, the egg and semen, and the ancestry of another! That takes some doing - taking the child that doesn't belong to you takes some doing! What audacity it must take!? A male New York mental health professional who is also adopted, and THE ONLY internationally-renowned and respected EXPERT in adoption, and also friend of "Watching The Watchers" says he couldn't take a goldfish from another!
To quell the guilt of - to groom - prospective adoptive parents, the titans of adoption have invented the term, birthmother, which implies distance between the single mom and her child - the term is meant to make her appear like a non-mother! It is analogous to the n-word. The adoption industry is currently considering the use of the term, birther, when referring to the natural mother of an adopted child. (How do ya' like that one, ladies and girls? Are you insulted, yet!?) The industry continues to stoop to new lows! Why not just call her an incubator!? Or, a baby machine? Single moms, hold on tight to your dreams! And your kids! Or be smart and get some troglodytes to protect you, if you must!
Of course, there will always be some vulnerable single mom with low self-esteem who will not realize that she is being insulted and demeaned and programmed by the use of the disgusting term - birthmother. The subtle, yet profound, brainwashing continues throughout her Life each time she is called birthmother - long after mom is separated from her child. To keep the single mom in her place, to assure she won't interfere with adoptive parents, the brainwashing continues in all sorts of media, for instance! The use of that word subtly and profoundly reminds her that she only gave birth to a child!
More accurate and acceptable terms are natural mom (a mom created by God or nature) or 1st mom. Or, how about just plain ole' mom? Leave the adopted kid with some dignity! Let him just have two moms! We do it all the time with stepchildren! Why do you put the adoption noose around the neck of the child born to a single mom? Isn't Life tough enough without the extra weight and burden of dealing with adoption's repercussions throughout the lifetime of the adopted individual? The stigma of adoption always lingers. Not to mention the equally and superlatively unnecessary noose around the neck of the single mom - the extra weight and burden of dealing with adoption's repercussions throughout the lifetime of the single mom! Isn't Life tough enough!?
A few short decades ago, it was like "the end of the world" for a family to discover that an unmarried daughter is pregnant. The unmarried son? Not so much! He was thought of as a he-man, an Italian- Stallion, for instance. In some indoctrinated religious circles, today, this scenario is still traumatic for the daughter in a family and still not at all traumatic for the son. We, of course, feel that every child is a gift to every family, and tribe, into which the child is born! The unmarried mom is not a baby machine or incubator for infertile couples! What audacity it must take to finagle the child from another!
There's a television ad out. Don't let the television ad that Sarah's daughter (Bristol) is promoting discourage you! In the ad, Bristol condescendingly claims that her family's wealth and fame enable her to keep HER illegitimate child something which the average young single mom won't be able to do as easily, she says. Like a haughty parent, Bristol attempts to teach us, "Don't do as I do, do as I say! What's good for me is not good for you!" That methodology never worked for any other parent down through the ages! Why will it suddenly change the collective minds and sexual habits of a world audience of young kids when Bristol says it? Pretty haughty!? Huh? Bristol Palin is just trying to save face by way of those ads! Certainly her peers don't watch Fox News, where the ad was advertised. Bristol's handlers really think you people are dummies! RICH, or POOR, there is just no way that anyone else is getting their slimy paws on Sarah Palin's grandchild! Just try it! She'll use that rifle ( that she always speaks of ) on you! Keeping and raising your child is all about self-esteem!
* In Indian culture (India), one's name tells the whole heritage and story of one's Life, the house one lives in, perhaps even the street on which one lives.
* Hebrew names tell the whole identifying story, too.
* In European villages, one's home is referred to by the name of the previous resident who resided there, perhaps, decades or a century earlier. For instance, the name of one's home or house would be alluded to with something like, "Oh, yeah, Caleigh Brooks lives by the Smith's," and the Smith family likely lived in the house decades or centuries earlier. Across the board, the emphasis is on family and heritage, as it should be.
ALL PARENTS WHO THINK PARENTING IS SO DIFFICULT, JUST PUT YOUR KIDS UP FOR ADOPTION! What's the problem!?
Don't let "them" fool you! Parenting children is quite simple, and enjoyable! (Of course, parenting children with mental illness is sad and not quite as enjoyable as parenting should be.) We believe wholeheartedly that the root of problems with children is the inadequacy of parents - poor parenting skills! (Go ahead! Ask Dr. Phil!) We believe that infants are "blank slates" - tabula rasa. If you run into a problem, a crick in the road of parenting, "Seek professional help! Don't cry about it! Get yourself and your children some counseling!" (something most of our parents could have used)
Have some self-esteem about yourselves! Parent smartly! Single moms, don't be martyrs! Don't give your irreplaceabe gifts away! Don't give a part of yourself away! Otherwise, well be hearing from a tearful you in a couple of decades after you haven't been able to produce any other children. Sometimes, God only gives us the gift of ONE child! Young vulnerable moms think that since they gave birth once, they will give birth a 2nd time, but as we all know this is not always the case.
We are also well aware that one child does not replace another! Giving birth to a 2nd child doesn't replace the 1st child. A mom always remembers! So, just take the gift that God - Universe has given you and run with it! Enjoy!
Take parenting your child one step at a time, one day at a time, like everyone else does! Don't think of the whole legal 18 years of parenting a child to adulthood all at once! Nobody else does! That's what the adoption industry wants you to do! Don't be so hard on yourself! That's what the adoption industry is counting on! The adoption industry has their proverbial fingers crossed hoping you'll talk yourself right out of parenting your child! Family separators, that includes adoptive families, are VERY shrewd! They're likely older than you and more experienced at Life.
So, to those who, insultingly, keep insisting that parenting is the hardest job in the world, we say:
Why is there so little value placed on family and heritage in 2010 C.E. in the United States!? Because the media is powerful and because adoptive parents minimize the single parent in the media every day - just by virtue of possessing the child of the single parent! The losers of the children are never on television or in any other kind of media! The media doesn't want to hear from those families who have lost kids to adoption! Why is that!? Because the adoption industry is too powerful! Adoptive families are big spenders. Single parents are presumed to be poor and inferior! (See how "they" think about you!?) Adoptive families it is presumed buy the products that the media advertises! Also, the media feels that single parents are depressing - trailer-park trash! Why put them on tv?
Don't allow the media to keep sending out the message to society that your family is unimportant! The way to stop the media from broadcasting your unimportance is don't allow your relatives to be adopted! Here are some questions to ponder about the media:
* Why are only adoptive parents in the media touting their adoptive lives?
* Why are single moms who lose kids to adoption not allowed the same voice in the media? Why are single parents not given the same access to the media that adoptive parents enjoy?
* Why don't callous adoptive parents and the media give one iota about hurting the feelings of the millions of families from whom the kids have been extracted while single moms, and their families, who are tricked out of their kids continue to protect the feelings of the adoptive parents? Who the hell are you, adoptive strangers!? Those days are over, baby! The flagrant and brazenly joyous flaunting of the human acquisitions of adoptive parents in the media - - - the utter disrespect and disregard for the feelings of the natural parents who have been separated from their children through adoption - - - are why we have no qualms about being as frank and honest as we have been in this commentary! YOU would want nothing less? Would you!? Riiiight? Honesty is the best policy!? Riiiight? What's good for the goose, we assume, is still good for the gander! Riiiight!?
* Why is the victim still expected, forced, to protect the aggressor/predator in 2010 C.E.? That is the ultimate question. In societies across the globe, (1) single moms are, first, tricked out of their children and then (2) single moms are expected to elevate the adoptive parents/predators and lower themselves!? SINGLE MOMS ARE TRICKED OUT OF THEIR KIDS BY STRANGERS, AND THEN PRAISE THE STRANGERS! We'll tell you: Victimization is a bitch! { Pardon our French. Frankly, we vehemently resent the bad connotation that our idiotic patriarchs have foisted on our beautiful, intelligent, female dogs! }
* If single moms who lose their kids to adoption do such a good thing, why don't we hear from them? Or about them!? Why does the media push single moms to the background? If adoption is so great, why the big secret? Because out in the open, adoption wouldn't fly so well! How long should the shame of bearing a child while single linger? Why are adoptive parents made so superior?
We think this says it all!
Why are you not important in your society? Because advertising single moms who lose the kids to adoption wouldn't be good for business! Adoption would be seen as the disgusting and predatory act that it is! Single moms, and families, you owe it to those who will come after you to keep your families together! Don't elevate others and put yourselves down! Elevate yourselves! Don't praise others by remaining in the background! Don't defer to people! It's a big world out there! Get help!
For once, he put a positive spin on NOT putting a child on the adoption block! (Please see: Notes #4) On a recent Dr. Phil show, he said, "Don't think that your family is too dysfunctional for you to keep and raise your baby. My family, and childhood, was so dysfunctional that, if anything, social workers would have put us up for adoption!" The audience chuckled at the way he contradicted a pregnant mom who was thinking about adoption for her child because her brother is supposedly dysfunctional. Thanks, Dr. Phil, for once telling the truth about adoption! Show us a family that is not dysfunctional and we'll show you a family that IS dysfunctional because - anyone who thinks his, or her, family is perfect is obviously dysfunctional AND delusional!
#1 *The Video is disgusting! And criminal!
#2 The illegitimate stamp: For your enjoyment and elucidation we looked up the definition of the adjective, illegitimate, on Dictionary.com which is one of our favorite websites. We're curious whether this term is still stamped on the birth certificates of the offspring of single parents? And when did that change?
( Single moms of the past weren't allowed to put the name of the dads on the birth certificates of their children. The industry didn't want to know. "They" didn't want a dad around to complicate things! )
Would the powerful people really still have the nerve in 2010 C.E.!?
You can thank our idiotic patriarchs for yet another disgusting custom of the United States!
Below is the heavy noose put around the neck of an innocent gift from God - Universe. Illegitimate is the label by which the adoption industry has separated, and continues to separate, vulnerable families! The aura of "the illegitimate child" is still alive and well in the 21st century! Illegitimate means:
#4 Dr. Phil is an American psychologist who has his own hour-long daily television program during which he helps people with psychological problems of the day. Billionaire Oprah Winfrey made Dr. Phil who he is today.
We thank the perspicacious producers of * the Video, entitled, "Sinners" - BBC Northern Ireland and Parallel Film Productions LTD. Productions - who have absolutely and skillfully and brilliantly captured the aura of the times that we are attempting to describe much better than we are able to describe the barbaric experience of "the single mom of the recent past" by way of the written word. As with anything else in Life, you had to be there, as they say. You be the judge. (We view our use of the adjective, barbaric, in the same breath as "adoption industry" to be an insult to barbarians and we apologize to the barbarians of the world because the experience of the single mom has been worse than barbaric!)
In short, to comply with SOCIETAL MORES (rules), single moms of the past were forced to hide in Homes For Unwed Mothers where they left their newborn infants alone on the adoption block to the highest bidder. After living within the comforting waters of Mommy's tummy for 9 months, these babies were left alone with strangers! (Today some single moms still hide in these "homes.") They did this to protect themselves and their families from ostracism by their society (ostracism by their cheap, low-grade, neighbors - you know who you are). Single moms were forced to sacrifice their children because of the shame, stigma, the disgrace, the AUDACITY of giving birth to one's own offspring while UNmarried. Our goal is to have women, and men, think for themselves and not give a hoot what their low-grade neighbors may think! It's a big world our there! You don't need them! Be smart!
* Despite our honorable, larger-than-Life forefathers of the 18th century guaranteeing in the United States Constitution the right of every parent, single and married, to parent his, or her, own child, the majority in our society decided to ban together and make up its own rules in the 20th century! In other words, your small, conniving, jealous, dishonorable neighbors made up their own rules about single parenthood. This overriding of the Constitution shows just how powerful societal mores can be!
* Our forefathers even went as far as to guarantee that the government will financially help single and married parents who cannot afford to raise their children!
From where did the disconnect between the U.S. Constitution and societal mores sprout? Only since the mid-20th century has there been cyclopean pressure on single parents to give their children for adoption! What has been the source of this haughty pressure? Well, of course - MONEY! and JEALOUSY! and a sense of ENTITLEMENT! (Infertile couples believe, "Hey, we're entitled to a child like everybody else!")
(This whole entry is the answer to the aforementioned question.)
Complete families have been (and still are today) coerced and brainwashed into leaving their illegitimate infants (Please see: Notes #2) for infertile but married strangers who follow societal rules to scoop up. This expiation or remedy or atonement was expected of single parents of the 20th century. When you think about it - the whole dance of married strangers with fertility issues being in "the private sexual space of single parents where they don't belong" reeks of incestuousness of the highest order - this incest would fuel the disgraceful adoption industry of the 20th century!
Single moms were forced to hide just like homosexuals of the past were forced to hide, and illegitimate was the offensive and degrading term used to stigmatize the innocent baby of the single mom who was quickly labeled a slut. The adjective was just another avenue with which to extract the child. To seal the deal! To seal the coffins of single moms who have sinned! To make sure the single mom doesn't rear her ugly little head in the future and to make sure the adoptive parents live in peace and harmony, "Let us totally annihilate the psyche of the single mom so she doesn't come back when the pain gets to be too much to bear," was the thinking! Instead of a literal branding iron, illegitimate was the adjective used to brand the innocent gifts that God - Universe brought forth from the bosom of single moms - yet another concept we can thank our idiotic patriarchs for!
During the mid - 20th century, Homes For Unwed Mothers sprouted up in the United States and all over the globe - not exclusively but mostly wherever the pope and/or Christianity ruled. Inside, and outside, these "homes," vulnerable pregnant women and girls, and their complete vulnerable families, were brainwashed out of their healthy, Caucasian, infants by various means of indoctrination to fuel the multi-billion dollar adoption industry. Researchers have called this separation of families an experiment - a way to legitimize the job of the social worker. Besides the legitimization of the profession of social work, we call the adoption process a distribution of wealth, the wealth being the Caucasian infants.
WHO STARTED THE INDUSTRY OF ADOPTION?
An adoption execution can cost anywhere from $30,000 to $50,000!!!The law of supply and demand superlatively and quite simply illustrates the execution of adoption. Simply put ~ a booming market existed (and still exists today) and greedy and unscrupulous, entrepreneurs leapt at the opportunity. There was a demand (infertile couples) for a product (healthy Caucasian babies) and tragically the supply was finagled from vulnerable single moms who had no troglodytes to protect them - single moms were elected to pay the ultimate price! The brainwashing techniques by which scheming marketeers extracted infants was stigma, shame, disgrace, the threat of exile, ostracism.... We're tellin' you - our slimy entrepreneurs are slick! The scheme of the adoption industry (remember - infertile couples are the demand in the adoption industry) went something like this, "...Hmmm, let's make single motherhood a disgrace and set up Homes For Unwed Mothers where single moms will be forced to hide to protect their families from exile and 'voila' we've got ourselves an industry... adoption attorneys, adoption agencies, social workers... yeah, we can get rich! And we can use religion to make it all look legal... on the up and up! Who could object to that? Besides - the sluts can always have more kids! What's the harm!? Infertile couples are ENTITLED to raise a family, too! Let's spread the wealth! What's the big deal? They have to learn to follow the rules! They're sinners!"
A few Homes For Unwed Mothers still brazenly and arrogantly exist; albeit, the indoctrination, the brainwashing, the grooming, is much more subtle befitting the times that we live in since shame and stigma... no longer work quite so well. Although, in religious circles, these brainwashing techniques by which to extract children from the vulnerable still work quite nicely. Today slick, shameless, titans advertise on the Internet, "...Pregnant? If you're alone with your secret, we can help...."
In 2010 C.E., procuring infants for infertile couples to adopt is tougher so the adoption industry has conjured up new ways of separating families. There are many new tricks of the { adoption } trade. The following are only 8 new flagrant brainwashing techniques currently used to extricate children from the vulnerable:
- The hiding places, Homes For Unwed Mothers, are now called dormitories. Sounds more collegiate!
- Beware! The adoption worker of today is a wolf in sheep's clothing! Typically, the worker puts a warm and soothing hand of friendship on the shoulder of a vulnerable or poor single mom, "I want what's best for you. I understand what you're going through. I'm here to help you. You are in charge." Yeah, help yourself to my baby? The single mom admirably seeks help and education and support and the shysters trick her out of her child!
- Don't let them fool you with the "what's best for the child" or "in the best interest of the child" trick! You are what's best for your child!!! Don't harm your child by abandoning him, or her, to strangers via adoption!
- Losing a child to adoption is today called making "an adoption plan." That's about as disgraceful and sinister a tactic as the adoption industry can conjure up! Words have enormous power and adoption titans know that.
- A vulnerable single mom today admirably seeking counsel about parenting is groomed to view and describe herself as "not ready to parent." Adoption worker to single mom: "Honey, don't worry, we understand. You have a few more classes to study. We'll help you finish school. Let a couple take your baby while you finish school and build your future." Envision the adoption worker's { including adoption attorneys } warm and soothing hand of friendship on the shoulder, again. The single mom comes looking for help and guidance from so-called professionals and they help themselves to her baby!
- Hard to believe, but in closed adoption of the past the natural mom/victim was denied any and all information about her lost child for eternity!
Open adoption is supposed to give the natural mom some contact with her child, like pictures, cards, letters, or a yearly visit, as her child grows but the law does not bind adoptive parents to any such farce of a contract. Adoptive parents are allowed to skip town at any time and not let the natural mom know where they've skedaddled with her child. The law protects the adoptive parents! Open adoption is like making an agreement with a handshake.
"Trade ya' - a couple a' pictures a year for your healthy, White, infant!"
The single mom today is given a supposed "choice" of open adoption vs closed adoption but, more often than not, there is a change of heart in midstream for adoptive parents in an open adoption. As these strangers bond with the child that belongs to another, suddenly open adoption is not quite as appealing as before when they would do and say anything to obtain a child.
- Today the adoption industry has been forced to allow the single mom to choose the couple that will adopt her baby. Give us a break! What's that supposed to mean? She gets to pick someone out of a lineup of pictures! How demeaning can you get? "Let me pick my abuser! Let me pick my oppressor! Let me pick my victimizers! Oh, gee, thanks!"
- God and religion are shamefully and shamelessly still used by the adoption industry. Vulnerable single moms of today who choose the adoption route are brainwashed, groomed, to think that, "...God caused my pregnancy for a bigger plan. God has a plan for me and my child. God has shown me the way. God is good. God has a reason. God told me what to do. God made me do it. God will forgive my sin if I give my child to an infertile couple who follow the rules and, hence, deserve my child. I must be punished. I am a sinner...."
SPEAKING OF GOD:
We don't mind people invoking the name of God during a conversation - even a few times is ok - but every other word gets to be annoying and disrespectful to the listener. It's as if the speaker is attempting to convince the listener that by saying God's name numerous times during a conversation, the listener will be thoroughly convinced that God loves the speaker best. The listener is supposed to rest assured that the speaker is a good person just because he, or she, has mentioned God's name umpteen times. It's immature, childish, of the speaker and insulting to the listener. How often have our eyes glazed over listening to such a speaker? Very often!
* It's usually only one speaker in a conversation that has the pomposity to invoke God's name continually. How comedical would the scenario be with both speakers or many speakers invoking God's name in a conversation at the same time? Shouldn't that be reserved for religion class in school? Usually, it's one kind and generous listener who, with glazed-over eyes, is forced to listen to the overbearing speaker. Don't be so kind all the time, loyal listeners! Take off in midstream! Look at your watch and explain, "Hey! It's been real nice! I gotta' go, now! See ya' later, alligator!"
* The supererogatory use of God's name by weak and brainwashed moms who lose kids to adoption - every other word in a sentence is God's name - borders on "Taking the name of the Lord, thy God, in vain" which, we believe, according to the 2nd Commandment of The 10 Commandments of most religions is something we are commanded not to do. (Please see: Notes #3) Using God's name in vain is a sin according to most religions. God does not need moronic publicity. God has been doing fine without our invoking His name at every turn.
* Besides these brainwashed moms, our political leaders all too often speak, and promote themselves, via the God route. Immature and inadequate "leaders" (underachievers) invoke God's name at every turn, too. We're supposed to be convinced, then, that they're on the straight and narrow. We're supposed to rest assured that they're honorable and trustworthy people. "So, vote for me. God loves me best."
More than likely, we have all spewed one or two profane words in our lifetime even if only under our collective breath. Our illustrious religionists of the past preached that people who are not good at expressing themselves use profanity. We say that people who overly pepper their conversation with God's name are not good at expressing themselves! We assume it's rewarding to blame every move we make on God? We assume it's convenient and comforting to think that we're not responsible for what happens to us in this Life? Don't forget - God always has that reason. We believe this is an irrational way to view Life and God.
At "Watching The Watchers," we love God! Yet, we wouldn't presume to foist our God and religion on you, so please do not foist your religion on us! Keep your private beliefs about your God to yourself during normal conversation about baseball, for instance. The two previous sentences in this paragraph are NOT meant for our loyal readers who Watch The Watchers with us; we totally welcome and encourage our readers to share ALL your beliefs about any and every thing in Life - that's what this venue is for! We learn from each other! WE NEED YOU! to foist your beliefs on us!
BESIDES USING QUESTIONABLE LANGUAGE, WE ALL DO SOMETHING ELSE!
Occasionally, or even often, we all tell ourselves positive lies to survive emotional pain and anxiety. These comforting lies are called psychological defense mechanisms which (1) deny, falsify, and distort reality and (2) operate unconsciously so we are not aware of them.
Young moms who succumb to the new trick of open adoption, and adoption, in general, tell themselves positive things to survive the pain. They'll pull up their defense mechanisms to survive the pain and anxiety of creating a child out of wedlock and feeling society's vast pressure to give the child to deserving married strangers who follow the rules; but, with maturity and the wisdom that maturity brings, they will see how they have been taken advantage of - tricked. They will realize that they have been duped. They will realize the enormity of the gifts that they have lost!
* There is no greater gift in Life than the reproduction of oneself - a child! Certainly a piddling job is not greater than the gift of a child! A career is not greater than a child! A house? A car? A college degree? We don't think so! We implore you: you won't try to compare a few college courses to the gift of a child? Will you?
Without summoning their defense mechanisms, moms who lose children to adoptive strangers would be emotionally, and even physically, immobile and couldn't go on with Life. Sometimes, the pain of Life is almost too much to bear. Some defense mechanisms that help us in our time of need are:
* Rationalization
* Repression
* Projection
* Reaction Formation
* Displacement
* Intellectualization
* Suppression
We walk away from the aforementioned 8 NEW BRAINWASHING TECHNIQUES shaking our heads in disbelief and wonderment:
"WHY IS THIS MUCH TIME AND ENERGY NOT SPENT ON KEEPING "THE FAMILY" TOGETHER!?"
For instance, substitute "not read to parent" for "ready to parent," "adoption plan" for "family plan"... Not AS MUCH money in it? Right? We assume there are enough true orphans in the world without extended families to fuel the greed and the sense of entitlement of adopters?
Why don't a few reputable "entrepreneurs" spend a fraction of the time keeping families together!?
We laud the famed and celebrated Cleveland Clinic Hospital in Cleveland, Ohio, for offering parenting classes and support for teen parents, and all parents - classes most of our own parents would have benefited from!
BACK TO THE BEGINNINGS OF THE ADOPTION INDUSTRY
IN
THE
mid - 20th CENTURY:
IN
THE
mid - 20th CENTURY:
You ask, "Why Caucasian? What about African-American, Chinese... infants?"
Sorry, no adoption market for Black kids in the past. Black single moms and their families were the lucky ones! Their families remained together. Noone wanted to adopt Black kids in the past - or if they did, the patriarchs - leaders - society would not allow adoption across races. Besides that, the White man wanted to keep the Black man down. ( Research supports this theory. ) The White man thought by allowing Blacks to keep their illegitimate kids, the Black man would remain down and out, poor, on welfare, but that's not what happened at all. Black single parents thrived, and continue to thrive, with their families intact. Blacks had the last laugh! We think that after slavery there is just no way that Whitey was taking ( via adoption ) the Black kids, too!
As we have attempted to illustrate, the majority rules - not just in politics! The majority in every society makes the mores/rules that the members of a society will live by. Until recently, an American citizen either followed these societal mores, or rules, or one was simply and casually, even vehemently, ostracized by their simpleton- neighbor. Where does one go after one is exiled from his, or her, society? All victims who have been labeled as unworthy of participating fully in the mainstream of Life, who have been forced to remain in the closet of Life, and who are today inching their way out of the closet, we thank you for your courage and hard work toward dignity and freedom for all! Thank you for paving the way for others!
CAREER WOMEN OF THE PAST:
During our patriarchal past, even single career women who became pregnant lost their infants to adoption just because they were unmarried; these young women certainly earned plenty of money with which to care for their children but the rule is the rule - the societal rule! Keeping their children would have caused them to lose their jobs and landlords would not rent to single moms - and not too long ago, either, a few short decades ago!
PROSPECTIVE MARRIED COUPLES:
More often than not in the past, engaged couples married right after losing a child to adoption; the price of NOT being ostracized by their society, by their goofy neighbors, though, was no illegitimate children allowed - the child of a prospective married couple had to go for adoption! Hard to believe? Right? Well, there's more! Our goofy society even counted backwards 9 months from the birth of a married couple's 1st child to see if the couple had engaged in pre-marital sex! How intrusively incestuous can a society - your neighbor - get!? People should get a Life and stay out of the sexual affairs of their neighbor!
THE BRAVE FAMILY:
In the past, there was a brave family with self-esteem here and there that kept the child born to a single family member. Sometimes, Grandma or an Aunt would say the illegitimate child is hers and the family was kept together that way. Prior to the 20th century, there was no such entity or institution as adoption! (You won't give the ridiculous example of Moses being adopted by the Pharaoh and therefore taking the children of another is ok! Man, people will stoop to all kinds of trickery! We can safely say we have heard it all!)
UNDERDOGS HAVE BEEN KILLED in the United States:
Being the underdog is serious business!
In the United States, besides single parents, gays are a minority, too. Gays who have bravely come out of the closet at the wrong time in the 20th century have been killed! Today, we still see the farcical, "Don't ask, don't tell," rule pertaining to homosexuals in the American armed forces. Today, President Ahmadinejad says there are no homosexuals in Iran so we can only assume that any homosexual coming out of the Iranian closet would be jailed or killed.
EVERYBODY KNOWS the trick BUT THE VICTIM:
We don't think vulnerable people realize exactly how SOCIETAL MORES (rules) influence them because the vulnerable are too busy trying to survive and, hence, can be more easily taken advantage of - tricked - when they're not looking! Hold on tight to your dreams! And your kids!
One example of the climate surrounding single moms of the past: In the United States in the year 2000 C.E., a couple friends of "Watching The Watchers" were sitting in the waiting room of a business as a toddler who looked to be of Colombian descent played on the floor. One of them, perhaps, asked the nationality of the cute little boy. "Oh, he's from Peru," the female adult casually and pretty adamantly quipped - there was no doubt in her mind. "Unwed mothers, they hide! The pope runs the country there!" So, everybody knows (and knew in the past) the trick by which babies were, and are, forced from the vulnerable single mom but the single mom! All of the savvy tricksters, including infertile couples, prospective adoptive parents, know (and knew in the past) the various avenues - the brainwashing techniques - used to trick vulnerable families out of their children, and they're obviously ok with it! Hm-hm.
BIRTHMOTHER VS BIRTHER:
Adoption titans have thought up new nomenclature to help quell the guilt and heart palpitations of infertile couples and adoptive parents throughout the Life of the child they adopt. For instance, the creepy (makes the skin creepy-crawl) and politically-incorrect, demeaning, insulting term, birthmother, allows infertile couples to rationalize (a defense mechanism) in their own minds and convince themselves that it's ok to take the child that is born from the body, the egg and semen, and the ancestry of another! That takes some doing - taking the child that doesn't belong to you takes some doing! What audacity it must take!? A male New York mental health professional who is also adopted, and THE ONLY internationally-renowned and respected EXPERT in adoption, and also friend of "Watching The Watchers" says he couldn't take a goldfish from another!
To quell the guilt of - to groom - prospective adoptive parents, the titans of adoption have invented the term, birthmother, which implies distance between the single mom and her child - the term is meant to make her appear like a non-mother! It is analogous to the n-word. The adoption industry is currently considering the use of the term, birther, when referring to the natural mother of an adopted child. (How do ya' like that one, ladies and girls? Are you insulted, yet!?) The industry continues to stoop to new lows! Why not just call her an incubator!? Or, a baby machine? Single moms, hold on tight to your dreams! And your kids! Or be smart and get some troglodytes to protect you, if you must!
Of course, there will always be some vulnerable single mom with low self-esteem who will not realize that she is being insulted and demeaned and programmed by the use of the disgusting term - birthmother. The subtle, yet profound, brainwashing continues throughout her Life each time she is called birthmother - long after mom is separated from her child. To keep the single mom in her place, to assure she won't interfere with adoptive parents, the brainwashing continues in all sorts of media, for instance! The use of that word subtly and profoundly reminds her that she only gave birth to a child!
More accurate and acceptable terms are natural mom (a mom created by God or nature) or 1st mom. Or, how about just plain ole' mom? Leave the adopted kid with some dignity! Let him just have two moms! We do it all the time with stepchildren! Why do you put the adoption noose around the neck of the child born to a single mom? Isn't Life tough enough without the extra weight and burden of dealing with adoption's repercussions throughout the lifetime of the adopted individual? The stigma of adoption always lingers. Not to mention the equally and superlatively unnecessary noose around the neck of the single mom - the extra weight and burden of dealing with adoption's repercussions throughout the lifetime of the single mom! Isn't Life tough enough!?
THE SINGLE DAD:
A few short decades ago, it was like "the end of the world" for a family to discover that an unmarried daughter is pregnant. The unmarried son? Not so much! He was thought of as a he-man, an Italian- Stallion, for instance. In some indoctrinated religious circles, today, this scenario is still traumatic for the daughter in a family and still not at all traumatic for the son. We, of course, feel that every child is a gift to every family, and tribe, into which the child is born! The unmarried mom is not a baby machine or incubator for infertile couples! What audacity it must take to finagle the child from another!
HERITAGE:
- Expectant grandparents:
There's a television ad out. Don't let the television ad that Sarah's daughter (Bristol) is promoting discourage you! In the ad, Bristol condescendingly claims that her family's wealth and fame enable her to keep HER illegitimate child something which the average young single mom won't be able to do as easily, she says. Like a haughty parent, Bristol attempts to teach us, "Don't do as I do, do as I say! What's good for me is not good for you!" That methodology never worked for any other parent down through the ages! Why will it suddenly change the collective minds and sexual habits of a world audience of young kids when Bristol says it? Pretty haughty!? Huh? Bristol Palin is just trying to save face by way of those ads! Certainly her peers don't watch Fox News, where the ad was advertised. Bristol's handlers really think you people are dummies! RICH, or POOR, there is just no way that anyone else is getting their slimy paws on Sarah Palin's grandchild! Just try it! She'll use that rifle ( that she always speaks of ) on you! Keeping and raising your child is all about self-esteem!
- Expectant family relatives:
* In Indian culture (India), one's name tells the whole heritage and story of one's Life, the house one lives in, perhaps even the street on which one lives.
* Hebrew names tell the whole identifying story, too.
* In European villages, one's home is referred to by the name of the previous resident who resided there, perhaps, decades or a century earlier. For instance, the name of one's home or house would be alluded to with something like, "Oh, yeah, Caleigh Brooks lives by the Smith's," and the Smith family likely lived in the house decades or centuries earlier. Across the board, the emphasis is on family and heritage, as it should be.
- Expectant moms:
ALL PARENTS WHO THINK PARENTING IS SO DIFFICULT, JUST PUT YOUR KIDS UP FOR ADOPTION! What's the problem!?
Don't let "them" fool you! Parenting children is quite simple, and enjoyable! (Of course, parenting children with mental illness is sad and not quite as enjoyable as parenting should be.) We believe wholeheartedly that the root of problems with children is the inadequacy of parents - poor parenting skills! (Go ahead! Ask Dr. Phil!) We believe that infants are "blank slates" - tabula rasa. If you run into a problem, a crick in the road of parenting, "Seek professional help! Don't cry about it! Get yourself and your children some counseling!" (something most of our parents could have used)
Have some self-esteem about yourselves! Parent smartly! Single moms, don't be martyrs! Don't give your irreplaceabe gifts away! Don't give a part of yourself away! Otherwise, well be hearing from a tearful you in a couple of decades after you haven't been able to produce any other children. Sometimes, God only gives us the gift of ONE child! Young vulnerable moms think that since they gave birth once, they will give birth a 2nd time, but as we all know this is not always the case.
We are also well aware that one child does not replace another! Giving birth to a 2nd child doesn't replace the 1st child. A mom always remembers! So, just take the gift that God - Universe has given you and run with it! Enjoy!
Take parenting your child one step at a time, one day at a time, like everyone else does! Don't think of the whole legal 18 years of parenting a child to adulthood all at once! Nobody else does! That's what the adoption industry wants you to do! Don't be so hard on yourself! That's what the adoption industry is counting on! The adoption industry has their proverbial fingers crossed hoping you'll talk yourself right out of parenting your child! Family separators, that includes adoptive families, are VERY shrewd! They're likely older than you and more experienced at Life.
So, to those who, insultingly, keep insisting that parenting is the hardest job in the world, we say:
- Losing a child, via adoption or death, is the hardest job in the world! You certainly wouldn't dare argue with us about that! Would you?
- Mental illness is the hardest job!
- War is the hardest job!
- Being a minority, an underdog, is the hardest job in the world!
- Being an amputee or a paraplegic is the hardest job in the world!
- Suffering from domestic violence is the hardest job in the world!
INTERNATIONAL ADOPTION
Speaking of the heritage:
Traveling to various continents to finagle children from the vulnerable has been the new trend in adoption. The reason slick and savvy American shoppers today scoot overseas to pluck off children is twofold:
(a) Single moms simply aren't cooperating in the United States of America like they did in the past. They're not that prolific! They're not producing!
(b) There is much less chance of intrusion by the natural moms and families from which the children are extricated. The poor mom isn't likely to hop on an airplane to America from Russia or China to get a glimpse of her lost child. We find this particularly amoral and unethical! Taking children from parents simply because they are poor is markedly abhorrent and disgraceful! How do these adoptive parents sleep at night with an Asian child sleeping in the next room knowing that family is half way around the world? Just wondering which defense mechanisms such adoptive parents employ to stop the heart palpitations and the guilt?
At least celebrities who finagle kids from poor parents of countries around the world return to said country of the child's origin and open a school, for example. They cough up a few million bucks to quell their guilt - to rectify and justify the taking of the child of another! But, the majority of adopters don't have that luxury! Yep, money will just about buy you anything! Except, of course, integrity and honor! Nope, money won't buy you respect!
That brings us to the end - reunion:
Isn't it a horrible thought? A pitiful mom waiting 40 years, or more, to look for and HOPE to reconnect with her adult child! It's insulting to the hilt! WHAT KIND OF ADOPTIVE FAMILY WOULD WISH THAT ON ANYBODY!? What audacity it must take to adopt the child of another!? A pitiful mom hoping she passes the test of being worthy enough of her own child? Adoption is a living death! Some part of your lost child will be emotionally scarred! Is that what you want? In reunion, you'll always be on anguishing tenterhooks, "Have I said too much? Will he call, again? Should I not have spoken of my pain? Have I offended? Will this be the last time we talk? Will this be the last time I see him?"
Also, don't forget, if you're in a so-called open adoption, adoptive parents can close that door in a heartbeat! By law, they don't have to give you any kind of contact with your child even though they said they would!
Traveling to various continents to finagle children from the vulnerable has been the new trend in adoption. The reason slick and savvy American shoppers today scoot overseas to pluck off children is twofold:
(a) Single moms simply aren't cooperating in the United States of America like they did in the past. They're not that prolific! They're not producing!
(b) There is much less chance of intrusion by the natural moms and families from which the children are extricated. The poor mom isn't likely to hop on an airplane to America from Russia or China to get a glimpse of her lost child. We find this particularly amoral and unethical! Taking children from parents simply because they are poor is markedly abhorrent and disgraceful! How do these adoptive parents sleep at night with an Asian child sleeping in the next room knowing that family is half way around the world? Just wondering which defense mechanisms such adoptive parents employ to stop the heart palpitations and the guilt?
At least celebrities who finagle kids from poor parents of countries around the world return to said country of the child's origin and open a school, for example. They cough up a few million bucks to quell their guilt - to rectify and justify the taking of the child of another! But, the majority of adopters don't have that luxury! Yep, money will just about buy you anything! Except, of course, integrity and honor! Nope, money won't buy you respect!
REUNION:
That brings us to the end - reunion:
Isn't it a horrible thought? A pitiful mom waiting 40 years, or more, to look for and HOPE to reconnect with her adult child! It's insulting to the hilt! WHAT KIND OF ADOPTIVE FAMILY WOULD WISH THAT ON ANYBODY!? What audacity it must take to adopt the child of another!? A pitiful mom hoping she passes the test of being worthy enough of her own child? Adoption is a living death! Some part of your lost child will be emotionally scarred! Is that what you want? In reunion, you'll always be on anguishing tenterhooks, "Have I said too much? Will he call, again? Should I not have spoken of my pain? Have I offended? Will this be the last time we talk? Will this be the last time I see him?"
Also, don't forget, if you're in a so-called open adoption, adoptive parents can close that door in a heartbeat! By law, they don't have to give you any kind of contact with your child even though they said they would!
NO MEDIA FOR THE VICTIM! ONLY FOR THE VICTOR!
Why is there so little value placed on family and heritage in 2010 C.E. in the United States!? Because the media is powerful and because adoptive parents minimize the single parent in the media every day - just by virtue of possessing the child of the single parent! The losers of the children are never on television or in any other kind of media! The media doesn't want to hear from those families who have lost kids to adoption! Why is that!? Because the adoption industry is too powerful! Adoptive families are big spenders. Single parents are presumed to be poor and inferior! (See how "they" think about you!?) Adoptive families it is presumed buy the products that the media advertises! Also, the media feels that single parents are depressing - trailer-park trash! Why put them on tv?
Don't allow the media to keep sending out the message to society that your family is unimportant! The way to stop the media from broadcasting your unimportance is don't allow your relatives to be adopted! Here are some questions to ponder about the media:
* Why are only adoptive parents in the media touting their adoptive lives?
* Why are single moms who lose kids to adoption not allowed the same voice in the media? Why are single parents not given the same access to the media that adoptive parents enjoy?
* Why don't callous adoptive parents and the media give one iota about hurting the feelings of the millions of families from whom the kids have been extracted while single moms, and their families, who are tricked out of their kids continue to protect the feelings of the adoptive parents? Who the hell are you, adoptive strangers!? Those days are over, baby! The flagrant and brazenly joyous flaunting of the human acquisitions of adoptive parents in the media - - - the utter disrespect and disregard for the feelings of the natural parents who have been separated from their children through adoption - - - are why we have no qualms about being as frank and honest as we have been in this commentary! YOU would want nothing less? Would you!? Riiiight? Honesty is the best policy!? Riiiight? What's good for the goose, we assume, is still good for the gander! Riiiight!?
* Why is the victim still expected, forced, to protect the aggressor/predator in 2010 C.E.? That is the ultimate question. In societies across the globe, (1) single moms are, first, tricked out of their children and then (2) single moms are expected to elevate the adoptive parents/predators and lower themselves!? SINGLE MOMS ARE TRICKED OUT OF THEIR KIDS BY STRANGERS, AND THEN PRAISE THE STRANGERS! We'll tell you: Victimization is a bitch! { Pardon our French. Frankly, we vehemently resent the bad connotation that our idiotic patriarchs have foisted on our beautiful, intelligent, female dogs! }
(1) The oppressor victimizes the victim
(2) Then the victim praises the oppressor
What's wrong with that picture? Why does this dynamic occur? Well, of course, we know the answer is low self-esteem (and brainwashing) and isolation - that's precisely what the adoption industry is counting on!
You can see the same brainwashing in the tragedy perpetrated by a man of the cloth in 1978 who took his nearly 1000 followers from California to Jonestown, Guyana, where he brainwashed them into committing mass suicide with him. It is the greatest single loss of American civilian life in a non-natural disaster until the events of September 11, 2001, the tragedy at Guyana also ranks among the largest mass murders/mass suicides in history.
Don't forget: The victim doesn't know she is being victimized by adoption! Victims don't know they're being victimized at the time of victimization. The predator is in his, and her, sick glory! Oppressors have free reign.
Don't let 'em have your kids, and then praise them, too!
{ Don't let adoptive parents have your kids
and then defer to adoptive parents, too!
Don't be that idiotic!
How many different ways can we say it!?
Where's your self-esteem?
We know
* first
they rob you of your self-esteem
* then
they rob you of your child!
We know how brainwashing works!
We also know
* * * After awhile the oppressor doesn't have to work so hard.
The victim takes over for the oppressor!
Don't be afraid!
Single moms, don't be afraid!
ALL parents are afraid in the beginning! }
{ Don't let adoptive parents have your kids
and then defer to adoptive parents, too!
Don't be that idiotic!
How many different ways can we say it!?
Where's your self-esteem?
We know
* first
they rob you of your self-esteem
* then
they rob you of your child!
We know how brainwashing works!
We also know
* * * After awhile the oppressor doesn't have to work so hard.
The victim takes over for the oppressor!
Don't be afraid!
Single moms, don't be afraid!
ALL parents are afraid in the beginning! }
* If single moms who lose their kids to adoption do such a good thing, why don't we hear from them? Or about them!? Why does the media push single moms to the background? If adoption is so great, why the big secret? Because out in the open, adoption wouldn't fly so well! How long should the shame of bearing a child while single linger? Why are adoptive parents made so superior?
We think this says it all!
Why are you not important in your society? Because advertising single moms who lose the kids to adoption wouldn't be good for business! Adoption would be seen as the disgusting and predatory act that it is! Single moms, and families, you owe it to those who will come after you to keep your families together! Don't elevate others and put yourselves down! Elevate yourselves! Don't praise others by remaining in the background! Don't defer to people! It's a big world out there! Get help!
DR. PHIL GETS THE LAST WORD:
For once, he put a positive spin on NOT putting a child on the adoption block! (Please see: Notes #4) On a recent Dr. Phil show, he said, "Don't think that your family is too dysfunctional for you to keep and raise your baby. My family, and childhood, was so dysfunctional that, if anything, social workers would have put us up for adoption!" The audience chuckled at the way he contradicted a pregnant mom who was thinking about adoption for her child because her brother is supposedly dysfunctional. Thanks, Dr. Phil, for once telling the truth about adoption! Show us a family that is not dysfunctional and we'll show you a family that IS dysfunctional because - anyone who thinks his, or her, family is perfect is obviously dysfunctional AND delusional!
N O T E S:
#1 *The Video is disgusting! And criminal!
#2 The illegitimate stamp: For your enjoyment and elucidation we looked up the definition of the adjective, illegitimate, on Dictionary.com which is one of our favorite websites. We're curious whether this term is still stamped on the birth certificates of the offspring of single parents? And when did that change?
( Single moms of the past weren't allowed to put the name of the dads on the birth certificates of their children. The industry didn't want to know. "They" didn't want a dad around to complicate things! )
Would the powerful people really still have the nerve in 2010 C.E.!?
You can thank our idiotic patriarchs for yet another disgusting custom of the United States!
Below is the heavy noose put around the neck of an innocent gift from God - Universe. Illegitimate is the label by which the adoption industry has separated, and continues to separate, vulnerable families! The aura of "the illegitimate child" is still alive and well in the 21st century! Illegitimate means:
- Outlawed
- Baseborn
- Misbegotten
- Unauthorized
- Illicit
- Bastard
- Invalid
#4 Dr. Phil is an American psychologist who has his own hour-long daily television program during which he helps people with psychological problems of the day. Billionaire Oprah Winfrey made Dr. Phil who he is today.
TOPICS AT A GLANCE
- * the Video
- Societal mores (rules)
- Supply and Demand
- Zeitgeist
- U.S. Constitution guarantee
- 8 New Brainwashing Techniques in 2010 C.E.
- Dormitories
- Beware of the world in sheep's clothing!
- What's best for the child?
- An adoption plan
- Not ready to parent
- The empty choice: closed vs open adoption
- Open adoption - the marketing tool
- Choose the infertile couple that will victimize you
- God and Religion
- Defense mechanisms
- Blacks and adoption
- Career women and adoption
- Prospective married couples and adoption
- The brave families
- Underdogs have been killed
- Don't ask, don't tell
- Everybody knows but the vulnerable victim
- Words have enormous power
- Birthmother or Birth mother
- Birther
- The n-word
- The single dad in our society
- Heritage
- Expectant grandparents (Sarah Palin)
- Expectant family relatives
- India
- Hebrews
- Europe
- United States
- Expectant moms
- Parenting isn't quite the hardest job in the world
- Sometimes you only get one gift
- No media for the victim - only the victor
- Reunion
- Dr. Phil
* If you haven't yet,
please make sure you read the May, 2010, entry in this blogcast
about
boycotting Elisabeth Hasselbeck,
entitled,
"Get The Bitch Off The !@#% Air, ABC!"
WE NEED YOU!
to be informed.
{ You never know when you will need to be informed!
Life has a way of pouncing on us!
Be prepared!
Thank you for participating! }
And most of all,
Enjoy!
please make sure you read the May, 2010, entry in this blogcast
about
boycotting Elisabeth Hasselbeck,
entitled,
"Get The Bitch Off The !@#% Air, ABC!"
WE NEED YOU!
to be informed.
{ You never know when you will need to be informed!
Life has a way of pouncing on us!
Be prepared!
Thank you for participating! }
And most of all,
Enjoy!
Birth Certificates
Welcome Fellow Intellectuals in the United States & Around the World!
Q U I C K O B S E R V A T I O N : #11
Because adoption is THE MOST MISUNDERSTOOD SUBJECT IN THE WHOLE, WIDE, WORLD, we are devoting the first half of this page to explaining what is coming on the second half of this page.
On the second half of this page, you will find a clever, and entertaining, article written by Rich Uhrlaub. In his article, he makes an analogy, a comparison, between 2 civil and human rights of the greatest, and freest, country in the world. One civil right - human right has been valued since 1920. The other civil right - human right still has no value whatsoever and is not respected and honored and protected in a free America:
* * *
===> Did you know that in the United States of America, the freest and greatest country in the world, women only got their right to vote in political elections on August 18, 1920?
===> Did you know that in the United States of America, the freest and greatest country in the world, adopted people are NOT ALLOWED to know who they are? THE STATE hides their private information [ their original birth certificates ] from them. This is the same information that every other U.S. citizen is ALLOWED to have.
For those of you who are not aware
[ which is just about everybody ]
about the desire of adopted people
to obtain their original birth certificates,
[ those birth certificates that were printed before adopted people were adopted by strangers ],
we have listed the following facts to help you understand Rich Uhrlaub's article below.
You know, those birth certificates that every other U. S. citizen takes for granted!
Yes, adopted people had families before they were adopted! Really? Gee whillikers!
Yeeahhhh, adopted people were once born! Wow? Really? Golly! How about that!?
Geeeee whiz!
Q U I C K O B S E R V A T I O N : #11
Because adoption is THE MOST MISUNDERSTOOD SUBJECT IN THE WHOLE, WIDE, WORLD, we are devoting the first half of this page to explaining what is coming on the second half of this page.
On the second half of this page, you will find a clever, and entertaining, article written by Rich Uhrlaub. In his article, he makes an analogy, a comparison, between 2 civil and human rights of the greatest, and freest, country in the world. One civil right - human right has been valued since 1920. The other civil right - human right still has no value whatsoever and is not respected and honored and protected in a free America:
- The right of women to vote [ honored & protected ]
&
- The right of adopted people to get their original birth certificates [ not the changed-version birth certificates that are made up to make adoptive parents feel good ] [ not yet! ]
* * *
===> Did you know that in the United States of America, the freest and greatest country in the world, women only got their right to vote in political elections on August 18, 1920?
===> Did you know that in the United States of America, the freest and greatest country in the world, adopted people are NOT ALLOWED to know who they are? THE STATE hides their private information [ their original birth certificates ] from them. This is the same information that every other U.S. citizen is ALLOWED to have.
===> Did you know that emotionally-healthy adopted people want to know who they are? Wow! Really?
For those of you who are not aware
[ which is just about everybody ]
about the desire of adopted people
to obtain their original birth certificates,
[ those birth certificates that were printed before adopted people were adopted by strangers ],
we have listed the following facts to help you understand Rich Uhrlaub's article below.
You know, those birth certificates that every other U. S. citizen takes for granted!
Yes, adopted people had families before they were adopted! Really? Gee whillikers!
Yeeahhhh, adopted people were once born! Wow? Really? Golly! How about that!?
Geeeee whiz!
T H E F A C T S :
- YES, ADOPTED PEOPLE WERE BORN, ONCE UPON A TIME! Woooow! Is that right? Naaawwww!
- Human beings get birth certificates when they are born! Wow! Really? After children are adopted by strangers, these birth certificates are hidden by THE STATE and they get new birth certificates! Yaaaay!
- Except for 6 or 7 of the 50 states in the United States of America, all the other states hide the original birth certificates of adopted people. Aaaawww!
- Even if adopted people are 80 years old and sick, these adopted adults are not allowed to see their birth information which is on their original birth certificates! They go to their graves not knowing who they really are! No way!? Disgusting!
- Adopted people get new birth certificates when they are adopted called AMENDED birth certificates. Yaaaay! Amended means changed. [ WTF!? ]
- The amended birth certificate says that the adoptive mother literally gave birth to the adopted person. [ WTF!? Really? ]
- Is the name of the real hospital in which the adoptee was born listed on the "new and improved" birth certificate? [ If it is, that doesn't jibe! The adoptive mother wasn't admitted to that hospital yet it says that she gave birth to the adopted person. ] Or, is the name of the adoptive mother's hospital on the birth certificate, when she had a kidney operation, for example? The adoptive mother wasn't in any hospital for a pregnancy! Which hospital name is on the new, amended, birth certificate? Ah! Ooooh! Yeah, the web gets pretty complicated! The plot thickens!
- Basic God-given facts about adopted people that every other citizen takes for granted are hidden from adopted people by THE STATE. Is that as in totalitarian state? That's scary!
- 6 or 7 STATES will put adopted people through various silly, INSULTING, and oppressive CALISTHENICS, or compromises, or contortions, before giving adopted people their rightful information. If you do these couple tricks, like stand on your head, or stand on your hind legs and get the cookie like a dog, WE will then give you your birth certificates. If you prove yourself, then, well, just perhaps, we'll let ya' have YOUR original birth certificate! Yaaaay!
- The adopted person is expected to forever be "an adopted child." Aaaaaw! Shucks? Swear to God? We actually call adults that nomenclature! No way! Wow? That's pretty insulting!
- The adopted person is expected to be consummately and overly grateful for having been separated from his God-given family and then adopted by strangers! Adopted adults must show great gratitude, and great reverence, for being taken in! Yes! Absolutely! In point of fact, adopted people must show undying gratitude for even being alive!!! Yaaaay! Naaawww!?
- What puzzles us the most? [ It doesn't really puzzle us at all - we really understand perfectly! ] The lack of support and encouragement that many adopters give to the children they have adopted, and purport to love, makes any reasonable and empathic person cringe! What kind of people adopt children? What kind of people would deny their children knowledge about who they are? If any of us at "Watching The Watchers" had adopted children, we would be the first ones to take our adopted sons and daughters to see where the heck they came from and who they are! We would shower them with this vital information and throw a humungous party to celebrate their origins. We would highly encourage our adopted sons and daughters to build relationships with their lost relatives! We would insist on it! We would help them build relationships with the families of our adopted sons and daughters. We would want to be friends, too. We wouldn't make our kids feel guilty for reveling in their private info! But, then, that's us. We're honorable. To make your adopted children feel disloyal and guilty for wanting to know vital information about themselves is UNCONSCIONABLE!!! To make the child you purport to love an amputee is, well, there-simply-are-no-adjectives in the English language! We hesitate to even say it's juvenile, for fear of offending our sharp and savvy young people!
[ As you read the following commentary by Rich Uhrlaub,
please substitute in your mind the phrase
"women can vote"
with
"adoptees can get their REAL birth certificates." ]
~ the above sarcasm was written by the crew of "Watching The Watchers" ~
~ below: the very insightful and entertaining author, Rich Uhrlaub,
has generously given us permission to publish his thoughts about
how adopted people have to beg for their REAL birth certificates - their identities!
And this begging is only allowed in 6 or 7 states in America!
The other states of the United States of America give no birth info whatsoever to adoptees!
Below readers will see the insulting hoops that adopted people must jump through
to get their original birth certificates ~
please substitute in your mind the phrase
"women can vote"
with
"adoptees can get their REAL birth certificates." ]
~ the above sarcasm was written by the crew of "Watching The Watchers" ~
~ below: the very insightful and entertaining author, Rich Uhrlaub,
has generously given us permission to publish his thoughts about
how adopted people have to beg for their REAL birth certificates - their identities!
And this begging is only allowed in 6 or 7 states in America!
The other states of the United States of America give no birth info whatsoever to adoptees!
Below readers will see the insulting hoops that adopted people must jump through
to get their original birth certificates ~
~ ~ ~
Adult Adoptee Access to Birth Identity
is like
The Right to Vote
by Rich Uhrlaub
is like
The Right to Vote
by Rich Uhrlaub
What if the debate over access to original birth certificates was examined in the context of another great civil rights movement - specifically the early 20th century battle to give women the right to vote? Picture yourself as a fierce advocate for women's suffrage who was offered any of the following compromises.
As with the right to vote, not every adoptee chooses to exercise the human and civil right to find their identity, and the outcome may or may not be what an adoptee hoped for.
BUT - no one should be denied the right to [ equal ] access to their ancestry and original birth identity!
- Women will be given the right to vote, but only if they are born after the effective date of the new law.
- Women can vote, but only after demonstrating "good cause" to a court as to why they are worthy to do so.
- Women can vote, but first must undergo professional evaluations and counseling to determine if they are ready to handle the responsibilities and outcomes of voting, which can be a very emotional experience.
- Women can vote, but only if they hire a third party to obtain written permission from their husbands to do so. Since husbands married their wives under laws that denied women the right to vote, millions of men have lived for decades with that expectation. That implicit "promise" made to husbands trumps women's selfish desires to vote. Women should just be grateful to have good homes and husbands who didn't kill them.
As with the right to vote, not every adoptee chooses to exercise the human and civil right to find their identity, and the outcome may or may not be what an adoptee hoped for.
BUT - no one should be denied the right to [ equal ] access to their ancestry and original birth identity!
* Rich Uhrlaub, M.Ed. :
- is a member of the American Adoption Congress' [ AAC ] Legislative Commitee
- is a member of the 2012 AAC Conference Committee.
- serves as Coordinator for Adoptees in Search, Colorado's Triad Connection
- is a contributing author of Finding Our Place: 100 Memorable Adoptees, Fostered Persons, and Orphanage Alumni [ Greenwood Press, 2010 ]
- is a contributing author of Adoption and Mothering [ Demeter Press, Fall 2011 ]
- Feel free to click on "Connect/Contact Us" and email Rich directly through the website www.aisctc.org where many resources are provided.
~ ~ ~
Since adoption is THE MOST MISUNDERSTOOD SUBJECT IN THE WORLD, the "Watching The Watchers" crew would like to volunteer the following Additional Explanations! It's a tough subject for the fledgling newcomer and we just don't think people get it! We don't believe people understand the injustice of the whole "hiding of birth certificates" conspiracy:
* Explanation of #1: In one state, i.e., an adopted person born before February 1, 1964, can get his [ her ] original birth certificate; but, an adoptee born after February 1, 1964, in the same state cannot get his [ her ] original birth certificate. Oops, too bad, you were born one day late. Sorry, no birth certificate for you? You shouldda' been born a day earlier! [ Just how moronic are we in the United States of America? The world is laughing at us! The scenario reminds us of those cute commercials about Ally Bank in which children keep getting the runaround; you can find them by Googling "Ally Bank Commercials." Enjoy! ]
* Explanation of #2: In another state, i.e., an adult adoptee has to go to court and tell the judge why he [ she ] wants his [ her ] real birth certificate. The greatest and freest country in the world treats its adults like children, "Let me go ask my mommy and daddy if I can see who I am."
* Explanation of #3: In yet another state, i.e., an adopted person must go to a shrink to see if it's ok to give the adopted person his [ her ] own personal and private original birth certificate. How insulting is that!? As if wanting to know who you are is a mental illness? You can't handle the truth! [ Jack Nicholson's famous line in that movie. A Few Good Men? ]
* Explanation of #4: In yet another state, i.e., an adopted person must have a go-between - a person who will contact the natural mother, the first mother, of the adopted person to see if it's ok to give her lost 40 or 55 year-old son [ daughter ] the first mother's name. The people in power say that they can't give adopted people their original birth certificates because decades ago, at the time of said adoptions, their first mothers were promised that the mothers' names would be kept a secret. This is absolutely not true! This is just an excuse to protect the powerful people! These hiders of "information that doesn't belong to them" aren't nice people; they're afraid that the adoption business, the adoption industry, would dwindle if people knew how crooked and coercive it is. Mothers were never promised CONFIDENTIALITY at the time the child was given away! We have yet to find ONE mother that was promised confidentiality when her child was lost to adoption! Confidentiality means that the names of the mothers [ who lose their children via adoption ] would be kept confidential - a secret. After awhile, all these calisthenics, besides being insulting to the hilt, would be comical if they weren't so sad and disgusting!!! [ When we say the natural mother, we mean, you know, the mother that Nature intended the adopted person to be with. Remember her? ]You
better
stop
messin'
with
Mother Nature!
* A D D E N D U M
Via this blogcast, the crew at "Watching The Watchers," attempts to paint a complete picture for our readers about issues of the day.
After publication of this post, we received a generous update from Rich Uhrlaub to further help our readers see the big picture of closed birth records of adopted people:
* A few natural mothers who have lost children to adoption decades earlier don't give permission to the confidential intermediary, "Do not tell my lost son who I am." Why would a mother not want to meet her lost son or daughter? At "Watching The Watchers," we believe the following are some reasons why a mother would not want to reconnect with her child:
* Just for the record:
At "Watching The Watchers," we believe that a go-between - a confidential intermediary - disempowers the adopted person and the complete natural family. It's not a respectful practice! We believe that people must be given the respect to find their own way in Life, in their own time! Don't take away their power! As if they are little children! They are adults! A little respect, please!
We are for the empowerment of families and individuals, at all costs! We view a go-between of any kind, including private investigators, as being emotionally incestuous - being in private family business where strangers don't belong!
Also, let's say the first meeting of said people doesn't go well, at least the participants will have seen, and talked to, each other ONCE!
NO ONE, not mother, nor father,... and certainly not the government, has the right to prevent any human being, adopted or not adopted, from personally knowing his, or her, ancestry! If you're uncomfortable, mom, too bad! Get help! It's out there. No more secrets!!! No more lies!
Additionally, we would like to make perfectly clear that no [ unmarried ] single mother whose infant was finagled from her by the adoption industry in the 20th century was ever promised confidentiality! It simply was not something that was ever discussed with any mother! That simply was not in the procedures manual of finagling infants for adoption. Adoption titans just assumed that because bearing a child out of wedlock was such a disgrace in the 20th century that mothers would naturally want to stay hidden!!! Or, risk OSTRACISM from society! And don't forget, adoption titans were very, very, much a part of that venomous, ostracizing, society! We wouldn't doubt that the adoption industry started the stigma against single motherhood! We challenge anyone, anywhere, all over the world, to find one document that guarantees the mother's name would be kept a secret - confidential!
Via this blogcast, the crew at "Watching The Watchers," attempts to paint a complete picture for our readers about issues of the day.
After publication of this post, we received a generous update from Rich Uhrlaub to further help our readers see the big picture of closed birth records of adopted people:
- Virtually every state with sealed birth records (that Rich is aware of) has a provision for access to records upon demonstration of 'good cause.'
- A court's willingness to find good cause may be another matter.
- A number of states (perhaps 8 or 9) have *confidential intermediary [ ci ] laws on their books now.
- Some states report up to a *90% consent rate from natural mothers who are found. [This means that 90% of mothers say it's ok to give their lost children the names of the mothers; they want to be found by their lost kids. ]
- Colorado's consent rate from natural mothers is around 75-85% depending on the year.
- Of course, consent to contact is a separate issue from equal rights.
* A few natural mothers who have lost children to adoption decades earlier don't give permission to the confidential intermediary, "Do not tell my lost son who I am." Why would a mother not want to meet her lost son or daughter? At "Watching The Watchers," we believe the following are some reasons why a mother would not want to reconnect with her child:
- UNRESOLVED, BURIED GRIEF: Mothers who lose children to adoption may have stuffed, or buried, the feelings of loss and grief so deep within their subconscious that they say, "No, I don't want to be found. Don't give my name to my child." The pain of loss is so huge that to feel it, again, would be too much for some mothers to bear.
- FEAR OF ANOTHER OSTRACISM: Mothers who lost children to adoption in the 20th century could fear being rejected, ostracized, by their lost children, much the same way they were rejected, ostracized, by their society decades earlier for daring to give birth to a Gift while unmarried. Meeting and, then, being rejected by their lost children would just be too much to bear for some moms. They simply cannot entertain the idea of being ostracized a second time.
- LOW SELF-ESTEEM: Perhaps the Lives of some natural mothers did not turn out well [having had to function as amputees - cut off from their children ]? The natural mothers of adopted people might fear being compared to the adoptive parents and, then, rejected a second time. The thought of a second rejection is simply too much to bear - the first time by their society, the second time by their children.
- UNWORTHY OF THEIR CHILDREN: The damage of separation runs deep! Some mothers might still feel unworthy of their children - since the shame and unworthiness was so inbred into their psyche when they were coerced into giving their children for adoption. Making the mom feel like she's unworthy of her child is one of the tricks by which children are finagled from vulnerable moms - much the way Dr. Phil tries to talk vulnerable single moms [ and their families ] into considering adoption for their children. He even connects the vulnerable with adoption agencies. Why doesn't Dr. Phil connect these vulnerable moms to agencies that will help keep their families together?
* Just for the record:
At "Watching The Watchers," we believe that a go-between - a confidential intermediary - disempowers the adopted person and the complete natural family. It's not a respectful practice! We believe that people must be given the respect to find their own way in Life, in their own time! Don't take away their power! As if they are little children! They are adults! A little respect, please!
We are for the empowerment of families and individuals, at all costs! We view a go-between of any kind, including private investigators, as being emotionally incestuous - being in private family business where strangers don't belong!
Also, let's say the first meeting of said people doesn't go well, at least the participants will have seen, and talked to, each other ONCE!
NO ONE, not mother, nor father,... and certainly not the government, has the right to prevent any human being, adopted or not adopted, from personally knowing his, or her, ancestry! If you're uncomfortable, mom, too bad! Get help! It's out there. No more secrets!!! No more lies!
Additionally, we would like to make perfectly clear that no [ unmarried ] single mother whose infant was finagled from her by the adoption industry in the 20th century was ever promised confidentiality! It simply was not something that was ever discussed with any mother! That simply was not in the procedures manual of finagling infants for adoption. Adoption titans just assumed that because bearing a child out of wedlock was such a disgrace in the 20th century that mothers would naturally want to stay hidden!!! Or, risk OSTRACISM from society! And don't forget, adoption titans were very, very, much a part of that venomous, ostracizing, society! We wouldn't doubt that the adoption industry started the stigma against single motherhood! We challenge anyone, anywhere, all over the world, to find one document that guarantees the mother's name would be kept a secret - confidential!
The Definition of Adoption!
Welcome Fellow Intellectuals in the United States & Around the World!
Q U I C K O B S E R V A T I O N #10
A D O P T I O N :
The adoption of children is a violent act, a political act of aggression toward a woman who has supposedly offended the sexual mores by committing the unforgivable act of not suppressing her sexuality, and therefore not keeping it for trading purposes through traditional marriage. The crime is a grave one, for she threatens the very fabric of our society. The penalty is severe. She is stripped of her child by a variety of subtle and not so subtle maneuvers and then brutally abandoned."
Joss Shawyer, Death By Adoption, Circada Press [ 1979 ]
Everyone who thinks Dictionary.com or Webster's Dictionary will print this true, and correct, definition of the revered institution of adoption [ family separation ], please raise your hands. Adoption is revered by everyone!
No hands?
Adding Insult to Injury!!!
A Perfect Example of Adding Insult to Injury!
Welcome, Fellow Intellectuals, in the U.S.A. and around the World!
More
Abhorrent Aftermath
of
Adoption
[ Not all adoptive families are as great as we've been LED to believe!
Many adoptive families are quite dysfunctional!
Don't be led!
Lead! ]
[ All previously emotionally-healthy single mothers who lose children to adoption
suffer from
&
struggle with
Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder symptoms!
( PTSD )
throughout their lives -
the symptoms worsen with age!
there is no reprieve!
Soon after the loss, mothers suppress & repress to survive!
They employ defense mechanisms, such as,
repression, suppression, and the like.
Resultingly, don't expect them to be fully-functioning.
View them as the amputees that they are!
"to survive"
What does that hackneyed, ubiquitous, phrase mean?
It's bandied about so much that it doesn't even register anymore.
It means that mothers { fathers } who lose kids, lose the "will to live."
People who suffer severe trauma lose the "will to live."
That's why God or Nature or Universe has armed human beings
with "defense mechanisms" -
to get us through the tough times.
But, that's no way to live.
That's no fun.
That's not living Life fully -
because when you suppress bad stuff, good stuff also gets suppressed.
Who wants to live with half of her { his } personality shut down?
If these mothers don't employ suppression & repression...
and other defense mechanisms,
the "will to live" is gone -
out the window.
When the pain is so great, people want to die.
Without the "will to live," suicide looks pretty good.
So, the next time you hear those 2 words bandied about,
you'll know that suicide is, or was, or could have been, not too far away!
Defense mechanisms are natural,
we're all capable of pulling them up when we need them.
They help us escape the pain.
They help us "to survive."
The mind is a powerful Gift! ]
Psychology Class 101:
Defense Mechanisms have 2 primary characteristics:
1. They deny, falsify, or distort reality.
2. They operate unconsciously, so that the person is not aware of them.
Here are just a few that we've all used alot since childhood:
- Projection
- Displacement
- Rationalization
- Reaction Formation
- Intellectualization
- Repression
- Suppression
- Denial
The following phenomenon is difficult to explicate verbally
but
we'll keep trying.
In adulthood, the emotionally-healthy adopted man { adopted woman } searches for answers:
"Who am I?"
"Why was I separated from my first family?"
"Who do I look like?"
"Do I have any brothers and sisters?"
"What is my family's medical background?"
"What was my real name before my identity was haughtily altered?"
"Who are my ancestors?"
"What's my real nationality?"
"Of what race am I? I don't look Caucasian."
"What does Aunt Sally look like?"
"Why is my birth certificate false? Why does it lie?"
"Why am I not respected like every other American citizen is respected?"
"Why does my birth certificate say that my adoptive mother gave birth to me?"
"Could my natural family be rich?"
"Why has the U.S. Constitution not protected me and my rights - like it says it does?"
"I'm an adult! Why am I still referred to by my society as 'an adopted child.'"
"Why am I not as valuable as every other citizen in my free society?"
"Where is the respect?"
"Why does my society expect me to be grateful for living?"
"Why is my real birth certificate hidden from me by 'the state'?"
"Why do I have to worry about all of the above instead of concentrating on living?"
"Why is this noose around my neck?"
Along with the search for answers to these perfectly natural questions is a twist - a perversion, of sorts. There is a particularly goofy, feel-good, distorted, judgmental, answer adopted people yearn for! Adoptees love to see, "Where was I better off? I want to compare which family was better for me? My adoptive family? Or, my natural family? I want to see for myself which family was best for me?"
Typically and conveniently, sophomorically, the adopted person allows HIMSELF {HERSELF } 2 very different scenarios or outcomes or possibilities:
{ 1 } Life with the adoptive family
{ 2 } Life with the natural mom { the original family }
BUT, ODDLY...
The adoptee doesn't allow his { her } natural mom the courtesy of the same 2 different scenarios or outcomes or possibilities:
{ 1 } Life with her child
{ 2 } Life without her child
It's inhumane and unfair! Selfish. Uneducated. Uninformed. It's quite haughtily judgmental, and ludicrous, to believe that the natural mom's Life would have been the same { 1 } with her child { 2 } without her child. The adult adoptee loves to believe that his { her } natural mom's Life would have been the same had his { her } natural mom raised him { her } or not raised him {her }. It feels good, "Yippee! Her Life was lousy. I WAS better off adopted. Whew!" The adoptee's Life would be different within the 2 different scenarios; but, his { her } natural mom's Life would NOT be different under the 2 different scenarios.
A mom who has suffered the worst trauma - amputation - that could befall a parent - the loss of a child - A CHILD - is expected to have functioned the same { 1 } with her child { 2 } cut off from her child! That's quite absurdly obnoxious, perverted, wishful thinking!
Just one example:
* Why is this not obvious? ===> The natural mom would have been taken to different environments WITH her child, such as school environments, religious institutions,... whereas cut off from her child via adoption, mom has no need to venture to school environments, and the like, school picnics, hobnobbing with other moms, kids' birthday parties, playgrounds, libraries.... Having been betrayed by religious institutions that promote adoption, the natural mother certainly should not venture back to these religious institutions that have victimized her. Religious institutions have victimized, oppressed, the single mom simply because of her marital status.
Ok - let's try another example if that doesn't fly:
* The crude and criminal manner in which her child was finagled from the single mom leaves her distracted and vulnerable - easy prey for ADDITIONAL predation, oppression, victimization. Victimization breeds victimization - trauma on top of trauma on top of trauma....
To put it even more simply:
Let's cut off your limbs { arms & legs } and see how well you flourish!? Ok?
A Little Respect, Please!
Welcome, Fellow Intellectuals, in the United States and Around the World!
Q U I C K O B S E R V A T I O N #8!
On May 2, 2011, in Times Square or Washington D.C., a lieutenant or some kind of military dude in the United States armed forces commented on worldwide television news about the killing of Osama Bin Laden, he gleefully quipped, "The bastard's dead!"
Huh?
According to Dictionary.com and every other dictionary, the extremely offensive U.S. term, bastard, means: the child of a single mother. Please try to be more couth and show a little respect for children - our sons & daughters!
We believe that most people don't know or don't care to think about the true definition of this ubiquitous term. The lesson here is expressed quite aptly in the old aphorism, "Don't open your mouth and show people how stupid you are. Keep your mouth shut and leave some doubt!"
{ There ya' go, fellow intellectuals - finally, a QUICK ( short ) OBSERVATION! }
The simple word, bastard, has been given a bad connotation
by our illustrious and abusive and silly U.S. patriarchs
just like, i.e., the word, bitch { which simply means: a female dog },
has been given a bad connotation by our illustrious and goofy and abusive patriarchs.
Thanks idiotic, patriarchs!
Women certainly didn't give disgusting connotations to these simple words? Did they?
The simple word, bastard, has been given a bad connotation
by our illustrious and abusive and silly U.S. patriarchs
just like, i.e., the word, bitch { which simply means: a female dog },
has been given a bad connotation by our illustrious and goofy and abusive patriarchs.
Thanks idiotic, patriarchs!
Women certainly didn't give disgusting connotations to these simple words? Did they?
* The term, patriarchs, is used loosely in this blogcast. We don't mean the religious patriarchs of the Bible. We mean the secular leaders who have come before us!
Real Mental Health Professionals Speak!
*Welcome back, Readers around the World! You are valued!
Don't Just Take Our Word For it !
Q U I C K O B S E R V A T I O N #7
The following are utterances on adoption from highly-respected, prominent mental health professionals who have worked specifically in the field of adoption healing for decades; they have been in the helping profession for 4 decades at least. They were there in the beginning when adopted people and the moms who lost them began { roughly 2 decades ago } to timidly come out of the closet of stigma and shame that was foisted upon them by their illustrious, cheap, neighbors. We're not publishing the names of these savvy professionals because we don't have time to ask for permission to publish; albeit, we're totally certain that such permission would be granted absolutely and encouraged profusely. If you like, we will certainly seek the permission. These professionals are in the ACTUAL business of helping to change societal mores. These pros actually do help people in a Life that is VERY short! They don't hurt people!
- Annette Baran, the super go-to expert in the field of adoption and author, has continually averred that, "Adoption is a 20th century social experiment that failed."
- The prominent New York City adoption healing specialist and go-to social worker, author, and adoptee, avers, "Almost 70,000 babies are sold every year in the United States alone. Social work manuals of the day were very clear as to how to do the brainwashing in order to separate the single mother from her child.
- A well-known psychologist and adoption expert avers, "All adoptive homes are dysfunctional by definition."
- Adoption is about the professionalization of social work in the area of "child-saving."
- On January 15, 2011, "Infancy Memory at 26 Minutes" { Implicit Memory } was released theatrically to sold out crowds in 60 countries, 31 languages, 295 cities, and 341 venues. { Adopted people remember their beginnings. }
- "Arthur & Elizabeth Schlessinger Library on the History of Women in America" is a research library at the Radcliffe Institute of Advanced Study, Harvard University; a couple of years ago it received and stored for further research the oral histories of single mothers whose infants were crudely finagled from them by the adoption industry in the 20th century.
- And, much, much, more! { But we ask you, Loyal Readers, "How much time do we have to spare? Not much!" And we know, you're busy, too. Thanks for reading - participating! You are valued! You're changing the world for the better just by generously reading. We can't do it without you! We need you! }
Aahhh! Will the Imbecility Never Cease!?
Welcome, Fellow Intellectuals in the United States & Around the World !
Remember, Words Have Tremendous Power!
On January 14, 2011, Dr. Phil McGraw promulgated once again that, "THERE IS NO GREATER LOVE THAN A MOTHER GIVING HER CHILD AWAY!" It seems like he says it repeatedly every time we turn on his program. When is this emotional incest going to stop?
Lone Phil McGraw is still attempting to convince us, in the 21st century, that there is no greater love than a single mother { & her family-tribe } putting her child up for adoption by strangers, separating her child from her child's COMPLETE family and COMPLETE ancestry, changing her child's name and giving her child a false identity, in essence, making her child a psychological, emotional, and mental amputee.
REMEMBER:
LIFE IS VERY SHORT!
LIFE IS VERY SHORT!
Also, this is very insulting to the family-tribe insinuating that the family-tribe is too stupid to incorporate a new family member into its own fold! Who the hell does Dr. Phil think he is!? He talks to his viewing audience like you're fools!
Of course, you can bet Dr. Phil would never have given up one of his children! Had Dr. Phil been a poor single teen-aged father, he would have slept in his car with his children before he would have ever given one of them up for adoption! Go ahead! Ask him!
Remember, many, if not most, of our over-achieving movers-n-shakers were raised by single teen-aged moms, i.e., LeBron James and Oprah and many, many more. Why is Dr. Phil so fixated on the private sexual escapades of our young women?
Here is what adoption is: Adoption is a permanent solution to a temporary "problem" - that is, if you view a child as a problem. We, of course, view every child as a gift from God to its rightful family! Our God doesn't make mistakes!
We, at Watching The Watchers, are naturally fixated on adoption because the rich and the powerful are fixated on adoption - they want to tell you what to do with your sex life. Business must be slow; there's only Lybia in the news and boring governmental shut-down issues and the British Royal Wedding is somewhat in the distance.
Yeah, we're watchin' you! We could use the same argument right back at adoption-adorers, like Dr. Phil and Elisabeth Hasselbeck and Justin Bieber: SINGLE MOMS HAPPEN FOR A REASON! { and it's not to furnish YOU with children } Remember what ya' said: EVERYTHING HAPPENS FOR A REASON!
* * *
At last year's internationally-renowned and prestigious adoption conference in New York City,
Professor Rene Hoksbergen, PhD., of the Netherlands facilitated a panel
discussion about how, and why, DOMESTIC ADOPTION WAS STOPPED - BANNED - IN THE NETHERLANDS! Who are you going to believe? Dr. Phil? A talk-show host who hasn't kept up with his studies, one who is so rich that he has allowed his psychological license to lapse - one looking for television ratings?
Each year, mental health professionals, like Dr. Phil, are supposed to earn Continuing Education Units ( CEUs ) so they can remain updated on new and improved ways of doing business; research is continually being done and new and better, more humane, ways of treating people in search of psychological help are constantly being uncovered.
Or, are you going to believe a preeminent international expert on adoption and his whole Dutch society of people? Who would you say knows best? The lone wolf who's stuck back in the oppressive mid-20th century who loves to separate families? Or, do you believe roughly 17,000,000 Dutch people? Who would you believe? Dr. Phil or Dr. Hoksbergen?
It irks us that Dr. Phil always says he's only looking out for "the child." He's always hiding behind "the child." Well, why doesn't he mind his own business and leave families { tribes } alone to find their own way? Dr. Phil is still stuck back in the 20th century when, for example:
- The husband still had the right to rape his wife. There was no law against raping your wife. Did that mean that he could slap her around real good until she caved? You bet! It was her duty, damn it, to give her man sexual pleasure! Yes!
- In addition, there was no such animal as date-rape, either. There was no law against your date raping you after dinner.
- In addition to that, parents were supposed to beat their children into submission - "Spare the rod and spoil the child," was another sickness of the day.
- Psychiatrists and psychologists... believed - and taught in their prestigious Diagnostic Manuals - that homosexuality is a deviant mental illness.
- The mentally-ill and mentally-handicapped were cruelly, inhumanely, locked up { worse than animals } in institutions for Life.
- Words, such as, "pregnant" "abortion" and "toilet" were not allowed to be said on United States television.
- Couples { actors } who were married in real-life were not allowed to be shown in sitcombs on United States television sleeping or laying in the same bed; they could only be shown in separate beds; and, we believe, they could only touch by way of holding a handkerchief.
- Women weren't allowed to get credit cards - only if a husband would sign off on it, would a woman be given a credit card. Yep, the female needed a husband's permission!
- { We keep telling you that our secular patriarchs were "sick cookies"! And, to this day, we have to suffer from the repercussions of their sickness! How long are you gonna' allow yourself to be treated like an inferior second-class citizen by your cheap, inadequate, arrogant, "neighbors" ? HOW LONG!? }
Please remember, readers, that it was the patriarchs { the men } who conveniently made the laws in the recent past, yeah, men - Dr. Phil is a man!
Don't act like you're helping, Dr. Phil! { by taking our children! ok? } Don't help us so much and we won't write about you anymore.
Don't act like you're helping, Dr. Phil! { by taking our children! ok? } Don't help us so much and we won't write about you anymore.
Exactly How Imbecilic is America Becoming?
Welcome Back, Fellow Intellectuals in the United States & Around the World !
And a Hearty & Warm Welcome to New Readers, too !
And a Hearty & Warm Welcome to New Readers, too !
Q U I C K O B S E R V A T I O N #5
The United States is a GREAT country - it's citizens are completely free - free to be as imbecilic as they wanna' be! Look at tyrannized Libya today fighting for its freedom, for instance. We feel sick for the Libyan people and wish them the utmost and hurried success!
The following is simply too moronic for us to comment on much. The imbecility will speak for itself. Thank you Justin Beiber and Elisabeth Hasselbeck for saving us alot of time writing; although, we're seriously starting to doubt ourselves: Did we hear correctly?
- Elizabeth Hasselbeck has promulgated on "The View" that 16 year-old teen singing idol Justin Beiber's sharing his childish, sophomoric, perverted opinions about abortion recently in the media is extremely valuable for our society and must be respected by all of us - we must heed his wise counsel, she warned.
Hasselbeck had heard the 16 year-old on "The Gayle King Show" so now 2 television programs have given this kid a platform: he wants all female rape victims to bear children produced by their rapists. He says, "RAPE HAPPENS FOR A REASON!" This kid has been given a worldwide media platform to tell you what to do with your sexual organs and your family. When is this emotional incest going to stop?
Where are this kid's parents? How are they raising him? Their Christianity shows. More often than not, Christians like to dip in the private family business of their neighbors! They like to dip in your sex.
This is an example of how NOT to raise your kids. Remember, words are EXTREMELY powerful! According to Beiber, our beautiful young women and girls can aspire to being raped because - there will be a good reason for the sexual assault. It won't be so bad! God made it happen.
And our boys, too, should know that if they rape, there will be a good outcome. It's not their fault. There will be a good reason for it. God will have made it happen.
Our impressionable young people worship this kid - that's what scares us. You better teach your children before this kid does!
* * * If you believe that pregnant rape victims must give birth to the rapist's child, ok. We respect your opinion! But - please don't insult and brutalize the rape victim all over again by saying God has a good reason for the rape - implying that God made the rape happen. God made her rape happen but God didn't want you to get raped because you're more special. Remember, words have enormous power!Please share with readers some imbecility that you've encountered. We know there's plenty of it out there. We want to be forewarned! Don't allow imbeciles to monopolize the conversation! Don't let them be the only ones who are heard just because they're rich! With 2011 Internet, YOU are powerful!!!
* * * Do you think the media allows such idiocy to go over the airwaves so we, the public, can be warned as to what kind of imbecility is truly out there? Then, hearing such imbecility is a good thing. We suppose it's good to know who our neighbors truly are. Somehow, though, we don't know if most media is that noble. We think the media salivates at putting forth whatsoever sells or, of course, they're out of business.
Entitlement & Cannibalism
Welcome Back, Readers in the United States & around the World !
Q U I C K O B S E R V A T I O N #4
As you peruse,
please keep in mind that
before the 20th century,
in the United States,
there was no adoption of children,
as we know it!
Adoption of infants of SINGLE mothers
by infertile strangers
was the surreptitious trick of the 20th century!
ALL single moms who lost their offspring to adoption in the 20th century
were savagely, coldheartedly, arrogantly,
coerced - forced - tricked
out of their children!
It's 2011:
SINGLE moms are STILL coldheartedly and arrogantly coerced out of their children,
but the coercion is more SUBTLE & SLICK!
Adoption is Big Business!
E N T I T L E M E N T
&
C A N N I B A L I S M
"Aaawww, come on! I deserve a kid, too!
Give me your baby!"
"You can always have more kids!"
{ but not always - there is secondary infertility
caused by the traumatic loss of the 1st child }
please keep in mind that
before the 20th century,
in the United States,
there was no adoption of children,
as we know it!
Adoption of infants of SINGLE mothers
by infertile strangers
was the surreptitious trick of the 20th century!
ALL single moms who lost their offspring to adoption in the 20th century
were savagely, coldheartedly, arrogantly,
coerced - forced - tricked
out of their children!
It's 2011:
SINGLE moms are STILL coldheartedly and arrogantly coerced out of their children,
but the coercion is more SUBTLE & SLICK!
Adoption is Big Business!
E N T I T L E M E N T
&
C A N N I B A L I S M
"Aaawww, come on! I deserve a kid, too!
Give me your baby!"
"You can always have more kids!"
{ but not always - there is secondary infertility
caused by the traumatic loss of the 1st child }
This commentary will attempt to show what entitlement looks like! Joan London is a recent example. We love it when callous, snooty, predators put their feet in their collective mouth. { Don't forget, Fellow Intellectuals, we always include the oppression of adoption when commenting on surrogacy.... We include any entrepreneurship that deals in the supply & demand of children - we include any business that has children as its product. These businesses are usually disguised as "helping organizations." These establishments or companies will gladly separate you from your children." }
Words are enormously powerful!
Words set the tone for societal mores.
Words set the rules of a society.
What is allowed?
What is not allowed?
Words hurt!
Words can build & words can oppress!
Words will get you exiled from your society!
Words set the tone for societal mores.
Words set the rules of a society.
What is allowed?
What is not allowed?
Words hurt!
Words can build & words can oppress!
Words will get you exiled from your society!
On the February 22, 2011, Joy Behar Show, Joan London complained:
"...tsk, tsk, tsk, ya' know, there just isn't a plethora of
healthy infants to adopt in the United States anymore;
there was years ago, tsk, tsk...."
That's what entitlement looks like!
"Aaawww.... Joanie, Joanie, Joanie. We'll just get busy and produce more kids for ya.' Ok? Perhaps we'll put it in our school curriculum? We'll start early and teach our girls in elementary school to be generous with their bodies, to be good and generous Christians, and aspire to be paid surrogates in adulthood? We'll also continue to program our young girls to produce children for adopters - like we've been doing. We'll try to do better, Joan! We're sorry that our youth isn't producing fast enough for you."
What an insult!
"Aaawww.... Joanie, Joanie, Joanie. We'll just get busy and produce more kids for ya.' Ok? Perhaps we'll put it in our school curriculum? We'll start early and teach our girls in elementary school to be generous with their bodies, to be good and generous Christians, and aspire to be paid surrogates in adulthood? We'll also continue to program our young girls to produce children for adopters - like we've been doing. We'll try to do better, Joan! We're sorry that our youth isn't producing fast enough for you."
What an insult!
Where is the respect for our beautiful single mothers!? Let's just stop it! Stop DE-HUMANIZING our beautiful single moms! And dads.
Joan London is an American journalist, author, and television host. She was co-host of ABC's Good Morning America from 1980 to 1997 and is the author of 8 books. She has 2 sets of twins that were born with the help of a surrogate mother and has become a spokeswoman for surrogacy.
Because Joan can't produce her own kids with her own body, she feels ENTITLED to use YOUR body to create her kids! By hook or by crook, she's gonna' have a family; she's financially stable so she has time to finagle ways to get the job done. She doesn't have to worry about surviving like you do. She thinks she's better than you. She'll throw you a couple a' bucks to rent your body, "Run along, sweetheart, thanks for the use of your body."
There's just one drawback, sweetheart - you could die in the process!
We came in on the tail-end of The Joy Behar Show...
It sounded like Joan was defending surrogacy. In essence, she was defending herself, and other predators, who pay a couple a' bucks to use, rent, the bodies of vulnerable young strangers to carry and give birth to their children and then, "Get lost, sweetheart!" Do you want to be used like that!? Why does she feel the need to explain? Does she want to spread the word so more people will do it? Does she feel guilty about it? We think not! Those are not the words of someone who feels guilt!
Joan London is an American journalist, author, and television host. She was co-host of ABC's Good Morning America from 1980 to 1997 and is the author of 8 books. She has 2 sets of twins that were born with the help of a surrogate mother and has become a spokeswoman for surrogacy.
Because Joan can't produce her own kids with her own body, she feels ENTITLED to use YOUR body to create her kids! By hook or by crook, she's gonna' have a family; she's financially stable so she has time to finagle ways to get the job done. She doesn't have to worry about surviving like you do. She thinks she's better than you. She'll throw you a couple a' bucks to rent your body, "Run along, sweetheart, thanks for the use of your body."
There's just one drawback, sweetheart - you could die in the process!
We came in on the tail-end of The Joy Behar Show...
It sounded like Joan was defending surrogacy. In essence, she was defending herself, and other predators, who pay a couple a' bucks to use, rent, the bodies of vulnerable young strangers to carry and give birth to their children and then, "Get lost, sweetheart!" Do you want to be used like that!? Why does she feel the need to explain? Does she want to spread the word so more people will do it? Does she feel guilty about it? We think not! Those are not the words of someone who feels guilt!
THESE
ARE
ARROGANT, CANNIBALISTIC, PREDATORS
&
THEY FEEL ENTITLED TO THE USE OF YOUR BODY!
BEWARE!
Joan London & the other inadequates
are gonna' get children
by hook or by crook!
ARE
ARROGANT, CANNIBALISTIC, PREDATORS
&
THEY FEEL ENTITLED TO THE USE OF YOUR BODY!
BEWARE!
Joan London & the other inadequates
are gonna' get children
by hook or by crook!
Do you believe that a public figure would say something like that ALOUD for the public to hear? "Drat, these darned females in the U.S. just wont produce kids for us like they used to!" { Are all the axons & dendrites firing across synapses adequately?" } How unfeeling and uncaring and disrespectful of your neighbor can you get, Joan? { Joan talks about our beautiful young women and girls in the 3rd person as if they don't exist! Like our young women don't count. Yes, Joan, we're out here and we can hear your disgraceful, condescending, rhetoric!" How dumb do you think we are!? }
These predators can do this because they think you're not listening. That's what we mean when we say "celebrities" or public figures get so big in their own minds that they become callous dictators - they know what's best for you and your family. They will dictate to you what you should do:
The menopausal mother wanted to be a surrogate, again, a 2nd time but the daughter said, "No, it's too dangerous!"
These predators can do this because they think you're not listening. That's what we mean when we say "celebrities" or public figures get so big in their own minds that they become callous dictators - they know what's best for you and your family. They will dictate to you what you should do:
- "Make sure you give your baby up for adoption if you're single! Don't be selfish! Be selfless! Think of your child first."
- "Be a good and generous Christian! Be a surrogate for your neighbor."
- "Help your fellow man by giving him a kidney - while you're alive. Be generous. Be a good Christian."
- { And, self-flagellate while you're at it! }
The menopausal mother wanted to be a surrogate, again, a 2nd time but the daughter said, "No, it's too dangerous!"
"We { I } deserve to live, too! Aaawww, come on!
Give me your body organ!"
Give me your body organ!"
By the same token, that should be the answer to organ donation between siblings, "No, it's too dangerous!"
Why?
Because organ donors die in organ transplantation. It's unethical and immoral to pressure siblings to donate organs to each other while the siblings are alive. In the news just a few weeks ago was the sad and disgraceful story of a handsome young dad who died giving his kidney to his brother. Isn't one innocent, senseless, death one too many? Now the donated kidney is not working and the recipient assures us that he will not accept a LIVE kidney, again!
Especially, the non-verbal, unspoken, implied, pressuring of your sibling to give up an organ is cannibalistic! To mope around and leer at your siblings with your mouth watering, like an animal scoping its prey, is superdiabolically disgusting - unhuman and cannibalistic! "Let me eat your young!" What has capitalism evolved into? There should be a law against organ donation between siblings! If parents want to die for their kids, all well and good; parents are expected to die for their children.
What audacity it must take to expect an organ from an ALIVE human being!
Fellow Intellectuals, it's the Wild Wild West all over again! In 2011, though, in addition to:
* n o t e s
Keep in the back of your mind that it's all about:
&
Why?
Because organ donors die in organ transplantation. It's unethical and immoral to pressure siblings to donate organs to each other while the siblings are alive. In the news just a few weeks ago was the sad and disgraceful story of a handsome young dad who died giving his kidney to his brother. Isn't one innocent, senseless, death one too many? Now the donated kidney is not working and the recipient assures us that he will not accept a LIVE kidney, again!
{ Picture us shaking our heads! Are all of the axons and dendrites firing across synapses adequately!? }
Especially, the non-verbal, unspoken, implied, pressuring of your sibling to give up an organ is cannibalistic! To mope around and leer at your siblings with your mouth watering, like an animal scoping its prey, is superdiabolically disgusting - unhuman and cannibalistic! "Let me eat your young!" What has capitalism evolved into? There should be a law against organ donation between siblings! If parents want to die for their kids, all well and good; parents are expected to die for their children.
What audacity it must take to expect an organ from an ALIVE human being!
Fellow Intellectuals, it's the Wild Wild West all over again! In 2011, though, in addition to:
- wanting your money
- predators want to adopt your children
- cannibals want you to be their surrogate; like vampires, they want to feed off of your body to create kids for themselves
- and last but not least, cannibals now want your body organs, too - while you're alive! { Ok, we're aware that nice Latino dude who has his own talkshow and whose name eludes us at the moment got a kidney from his wife. When we think of his name, we'll publish it. We say if a wife wants to risk dying for her husband, ok. We understand. Pressuring a young sibling to risk dying for you just leaves a bad taste in our mouths! }
- How are organ donors supposed to live knowing that something might go awry because they're not whole - the way God made them? "I'm missing a vital organ that evidently God thought was important for me to ensure my survival. Would God give me an extra one just in case someone needs one?"
- Your siblings don't have to die to prove that they love you!
- Your siblings don't have to prove that they're good Christians by being martyrs! "I don't want to walk around NOT whole!? I want all of the body parts that God gave me! God made me whole! Complete!"
- Do you - the organ recipient - want it on your conscience knowing that your brother or sister died while helping you to live? How could you live with yourself knowing that you and society, entrepreneurs, and your religion, non-verbally pressured your sibling into dying for you!? And, then, you'll probably die, too, and your parents will have lost 2 children.
- Let's say you die from not getting the body organ that you need to live. Is it ethical and moral for you to make your sibling feel guilty for not having given you an essential part of his, or her, body!?
Fellow Intellectuals,
You better sleep with one eye open!
You better hold on tight to your children and your body organs !
You better sleep with one eye open!
You better hold on tight to your children and your body organs !
* n o t e s
Keep in the back of your mind that it's all about:
[ 1 ] Big Business and predation on the one hand
&
[ 2 ] pervertedly hurting oneself and then feeling good on the other hand:
- Surrogacy and alive organ donation reek of Munchausen by Proxy or Muchausen Syndrome by Proxy - a mental disorder by which individuals, or moms, physically hurt their children, rush their hurt children to the hospital and, resultantly, the mothers feel good about themselves from the praises and attention they receive from hospital personnel for being such good caregivers. It gives them a rush! And they do it repeatedly until hospital personnel catch on.
- Predators prey on vulnerable people who need to feel worthwhile... by renting their bodies for surrogacy... by donating their body parts while alive.... Vulnerables have been pervertedly brainwashed to think they're being generous - good Christians. We're pretty sure it gives them a rush!
- Think of the young people who pervertedly cut themselves to feel good. It gives them a rush!
- Christians in the past have brutally, savagely, pervertedly, imbecilically self-flagellated to feel good and worthy. We're pretty sure it gave them a rush!
T h a n k s f o r r e a d i n g !
Stay savvy!
Be informed!
We know you're busy!
We offer intellectual vigor!
You think for yourself!
You
make
up
your
own
mind !
Stay savvy!
Be informed!
We know you're busy!
We offer intellectual vigor!
You think for yourself!
You
make
up
your
own
mind !
