"Leave Our Kids Alone!!!" or "Madonna: The Adoptin' Fool!!!"
What'd ya' think, Madonna? Darker-complected people don't love their children as much as lighter-skinned people; hence, their children are more easily plucked out of their families? Who do you think you are!?
Without missing a heartbeat, and without shame, Madonna, zeroes in on vulnerable countries from the skies, like a vulture, with the vehement diligence and selfish intent to zoom in and pluck out a flower from someone else's garden without even being certain whether the flower has roots (parents...) and other buds (brothers and sisters...)? Without being certain whether the child is a true orphan? We picture a descending airplane with a harnassed Madonna leaning through the opening, and scooping up a child out of a tribal patch as a parent, parents, and/or relatives, watch in horror. Madonna cares less if there is a parent or an extended family member who would gladly take in the member of their family; this is clearly obvious judging from her last two attempts at adoption that she has proudly continued to broadcast.
Madonna, it is no longer fashionable to separate another's family to fulfill one's own dream of creating a family! Prospective adoptive parents will no longer be allowed to pluck flowers from other people's gardens under the guise of rescuing children or any other ruse; societies will no longer fall for that bosh!
I can guarantee that in 2009 prospective adoptive parents have already found other less demented ways of creating families for themselves. They now have their invitro... and other scientific methods by which to create children; they don't need the vulnerable as much anymore. Nor are the vulnerable in America as naive and obedient anymore... albeit, some still are (The loss of a young mom's child to adoption depends solely on the extent to which her family is shame-based! The extent to which the family worries about, "What will the Joneses think!? still in 2009, believe it or not!). Before the science, when there was the high demand for healthy white infants, young, unmarried, natural moms (and dads) have payed dearly. Whenever there has been a high demand for anything, a supply surely has manifested itself; and those healthy, white, infants were extracted from vulnerable families, by hook or by crook! The supply of healthy, white, infants has dwindled, so science has developed means, like, invitro fertilization, and the like. I'm certain prospective adoptive parents have already experienced the fact that it's no longer as easy to shame children from vulnerable families, vulnerable tribes, even overseas. It still happens some but, in general, THE DAYS OF THE RUTHLESS SEPARATION OF FAMILIES ARE OVER!!!
We think that Madonna thinks that people view her as being altruistic in her relentless and shameless attempt to adopt, when in truth, she looks like a fool! The height of her arrogance and stupidity is clearly evident on television! She even had her entourage, her photographers, along so all the world could see! She's obviously proud! The poor, little, rich girl looks like a pitiful fool flitting from country to country like a chicken with her head cut off in an attempt to pluck a flower (a child) from someone else's garden (family)! Rearranging her hat, she looks like a half-wit strolling slowly hand-in-hand with her daughter in the susceptible, sunlit, streets of vulnerable countries as her documenting cameras shoot. Madonna being haughtily photographed illustrates that she must obviously think that she's performing a good deed by separating families, separating tribes, yet she looks like a stupid, comedical, idiot! (I would say that she looks like a retarded adult in search of a doll but I don't want to offend the mentally-challenged community. Should I erase that!?) It looks like there might be some electrical misfirings between the synapses of her brain - the axons and dendrites must be somewhat askew.
STAY IN YOUR OWN WEALTHY BACK YARD, MADONNA! GROW YOUR OWN FLOWERS!
(I find namecalling extremely difficult. I don't know how the likes of Judge Judy, Dr. Laura, and Ann Coulter do it? They are some of my role models and, quite frankly, I don't know how much longer I can follow their example. It just does not feel right!)
For the better part of the 20th century in the United States, and in the rest of the world, envious prospective adoptive parents have seen, and have appointed, themselves as "the rescuers" of children born to unmarried mothers, even the children born to unmarried, career women, to teachers... who were perfectly capable of caring for their own children. The marital status of the moms was the trumped up excuse for the feigned rescue (the separation of mom and child) of these illegitimate children from their illegitimate moms, "How dare they? They are not married! Look, Ma, they're not married, and they gave birth to children! Look, they're not married! They have no right to parent children! We're married, we alone have the right to parent children, yet we cannot procreate! It's unfair! That's what it is! We followed the rules! ...They can always have more children!"
The fueling of this type of mentality, of course, was possible because there was usually no protection of a prospective husband in sight. The separaters of families didn't want the fathers of these "illegitimate" children in the picture, so it also went against societal mores for the parents of illegitimate children to marry; the child still had to go for adoption, even if the parents wanted to marry! There were some rebels who did marry after the child was conceived! But, usually, when the fathers weren't looking, married couples swooped in and scooped up the so-called "illegitimate" children, just like when Mama and Papa birds aren't looking, the eagle or the vulture swoops in and scoops up the baby birds and devours them. The secretive, dysfunctional, era of yesteryear was sick to the extent that a society even counted nine months backwards from the birth of a married couple's first child to see whether, or not, the couple had indulged in premarital sex. And, if it turned out that they had indulged in premarital sex, in the spooky minds of their community, the couple was basically shunned as sinners, "Oh, oh, we know what you did!" Married couples would, then, attempt to defend themselves by saying that their child was born prematurely to coincide with their wedding date. (Who would dare say that the sick, dysfunctional, "good ole' days" were better than "more" open days of today, 2009!?) The era was aptly coined by the well-known activist, Karen Wilson Buterbaugh, as "The Baby Scoop Era."
Is it that difficult already for the likes of Madonna to pluck flowers from American gardens? It's easier in more vulnerable countries!? Is that why these celebrities go Black? The vulnerable Grandma of Madonna's last quest, her most recent attempt at swiping a child (second that we know of this year) in the night from a vulnerable country said that she was bullied into giving her granddaughter to a supposed orphanage; that's nothing new. Vulnerable families have been shamed and bullied out of their children during most of the 20th century in the United States and all over the world. Also, the father of Madonna's last prospective child said that he was told his baby had died in childbirth. He wears the unique name of his lost daughter, Mercy, around his neck still three years after her birth. The love of parents for their children never dies! Madonna would fight a father over his own daughter!!!??? Whaaat!!!??? Madonna would fight a Grandma over her own granddaughter!? Whaaat!? The father of the child that Madonna was attempting to adopt a short time before Mercy was also in the picture!?
Any parent, or parents, or extended family members, that want to give their children to Madonna to adopt, raise your hands!
Which one of your children would you like to give for adoption, Madonna!?
Well!?
Go home, Madonna! And don't have the nerve to appeal in the court system! You are looking really arrogant and ignorant - that's some combination - fighting a father over his own child! You should really get those synapses checked by a neurologist!
[Do you think that this is a mean post? Well,
just think of how you - yeah, you - have, for
decades, treated unmarried moms (and their
families)! I would venture to say that you
were not very kind and loving at all! There's
that thing called karma....]
Without missing a heartbeat, and without shame, Madonna, zeroes in on vulnerable countries from the skies, like a vulture, with the vehement diligence and selfish intent to zoom in and pluck out a flower from someone else's garden without even being certain whether the flower has roots (parents...) and other buds (brothers and sisters...)? Without being certain whether the child is a true orphan? We picture a descending airplane with a harnassed Madonna leaning through the opening, and scooping up a child out of a tribal patch as a parent, parents, and/or relatives, watch in horror. Madonna cares less if there is a parent or an extended family member who would gladly take in the member of their family; this is clearly obvious judging from her last two attempts at adoption that she has proudly continued to broadcast.
Madonna, it is no longer fashionable to separate another's family to fulfill one's own dream of creating a family! Prospective adoptive parents will no longer be allowed to pluck flowers from other people's gardens under the guise of rescuing children or any other ruse; societies will no longer fall for that bosh!
I can guarantee that in 2009 prospective adoptive parents have already found other less demented ways of creating families for themselves. They now have their invitro... and other scientific methods by which to create children; they don't need the vulnerable as much anymore. Nor are the vulnerable in America as naive and obedient anymore... albeit, some still are (The loss of a young mom's child to adoption depends solely on the extent to which her family is shame-based! The extent to which the family worries about, "What will the Joneses think!? still in 2009, believe it or not!). Before the science, when there was the high demand for healthy white infants, young, unmarried, natural moms (and dads) have payed dearly. Whenever there has been a high demand for anything, a supply surely has manifested itself; and those healthy, white, infants were extracted from vulnerable families, by hook or by crook! The supply of healthy, white, infants has dwindled, so science has developed means, like, invitro fertilization, and the like. I'm certain prospective adoptive parents have already experienced the fact that it's no longer as easy to shame children from vulnerable families, vulnerable tribes, even overseas. It still happens some but, in general, THE DAYS OF THE RUTHLESS SEPARATION OF FAMILIES ARE OVER!!!
We think that Madonna thinks that people view her as being altruistic in her relentless and shameless attempt to adopt, when in truth, she looks like a fool! The height of her arrogance and stupidity is clearly evident on television! She even had her entourage, her photographers, along so all the world could see! She's obviously proud! The poor, little, rich girl looks like a pitiful fool flitting from country to country like a chicken with her head cut off in an attempt to pluck a flower (a child) from someone else's garden (family)! Rearranging her hat, she looks like a half-wit strolling slowly hand-in-hand with her daughter in the susceptible, sunlit, streets of vulnerable countries as her documenting cameras shoot. Madonna being haughtily photographed illustrates that she must obviously think that she's performing a good deed by separating families, separating tribes, yet she looks like a stupid, comedical, idiot! (I would say that she looks like a retarded adult in search of a doll but I don't want to offend the mentally-challenged community. Should I erase that!?) It looks like there might be some electrical misfirings between the synapses of her brain - the axons and dendrites must be somewhat askew.
STAY IN YOUR OWN WEALTHY BACK YARD, MADONNA! GROW YOUR OWN FLOWERS!
(I find namecalling extremely difficult. I don't know how the likes of Judge Judy, Dr. Laura, and Ann Coulter do it? They are some of my role models and, quite frankly, I don't know how much longer I can follow their example. It just does not feel right!)
For the better part of the 20th century in the United States, and in the rest of the world, envious prospective adoptive parents have seen, and have appointed, themselves as "the rescuers" of children born to unmarried mothers, even the children born to unmarried, career women, to teachers... who were perfectly capable of caring for their own children. The marital status of the moms was the trumped up excuse for the feigned rescue (the separation of mom and child) of these illegitimate children from their illegitimate moms, "How dare they? They are not married! Look, Ma, they're not married, and they gave birth to children! Look, they're not married! They have no right to parent children! We're married, we alone have the right to parent children, yet we cannot procreate! It's unfair! That's what it is! We followed the rules! ...They can always have more children!"
The fueling of this type of mentality, of course, was possible because there was usually no protection of a prospective husband in sight. The separaters of families didn't want the fathers of these "illegitimate" children in the picture, so it also went against societal mores for the parents of illegitimate children to marry; the child still had to go for adoption, even if the parents wanted to marry! There were some rebels who did marry after the child was conceived! But, usually, when the fathers weren't looking, married couples swooped in and scooped up the so-called "illegitimate" children, just like when Mama and Papa birds aren't looking, the eagle or the vulture swoops in and scoops up the baby birds and devours them. The secretive, dysfunctional, era of yesteryear was sick to the extent that a society even counted nine months backwards from the birth of a married couple's first child to see whether, or not, the couple had indulged in premarital sex. And, if it turned out that they had indulged in premarital sex, in the spooky minds of their community, the couple was basically shunned as sinners, "Oh, oh, we know what you did!" Married couples would, then, attempt to defend themselves by saying that their child was born prematurely to coincide with their wedding date. (Who would dare say that the sick, dysfunctional, "good ole' days" were better than "more" open days of today, 2009!?) The era was aptly coined by the well-known activist, Karen Wilson Buterbaugh, as "The Baby Scoop Era."
Is it that difficult already for the likes of Madonna to pluck flowers from American gardens? It's easier in more vulnerable countries!? Is that why these celebrities go Black? The vulnerable Grandma of Madonna's last quest, her most recent attempt at swiping a child (second that we know of this year) in the night from a vulnerable country said that she was bullied into giving her granddaughter to a supposed orphanage; that's nothing new. Vulnerable families have been shamed and bullied out of their children during most of the 20th century in the United States and all over the world. Also, the father of Madonna's last prospective child said that he was told his baby had died in childbirth. He wears the unique name of his lost daughter, Mercy, around his neck still three years after her birth. The love of parents for their children never dies! Madonna would fight a father over his own daughter!!!??? Whaaat!!!??? Madonna would fight a Grandma over her own granddaughter!? Whaaat!? The father of the child that Madonna was attempting to adopt a short time before Mercy was also in the picture!?
Any parent, or parents, or extended family members, that want to give their children to Madonna to adopt, raise your hands!
Which one of your children would you like to give for adoption, Madonna!?
Well!?
Go home, Madonna! And don't have the nerve to appeal in the court system! You are looking really arrogant and ignorant - that's some combination - fighting a father over his own child! You should really get those synapses checked by a neurologist!
[Do you think that this is a mean post? Well,
just think of how you - yeah, you - have, for
decades, treated unmarried moms (and their
families)! I would venture to say that you
were not very kind and loving at all! There's
that thing called karma....]
Posted by Caleigh Brooks at 5/8/2009 1:28 PM 
Categories: Celebrity and Adoption
Tags: ann coulter judge judy adoption dr laura schlessinger adoptive parents united states madonna america baby scoop era rich
Categories: Celebrity and Adoption
Tags: ann coulter judge judy adoption dr laura schlessinger adoptive parents united states madonna america baby scoop era rich
OUCH!
Reply to this