Monday, August 14, 2006
OPEN DISCUSSION: Please jump in
Reply to Comments:
I welcome and POST all comments and will try to reply to all. The purpose of AdopTalk is to talk and discuss issues of adoption reform.
That means I welcome a discussion/debate of the FACTS and issues in any post here. I have no “vendetta” and labeling me or my posts a such accomplished nothing in terms of the facts presented.
I challenge OriginsUSA or any member of OriginsUSA to tell me what in their main goal supports the preservation of families?
They don't even support or welcome those MOTHERS who surrendered our children and simply are used to using different a word. They do not support or welcome fathers or adoptees, and they certainly do not support or wlecome adoptive parents - even those fighting on the RIGHT side of adoption reform!! That's counterproductive.
Where is the INDICATION (forget proof) that complaining about or "proving" events of the 50's to 70s will have any effect on current practice?
US veterans of Vietnam who campaigned against agent orange, did so to get COMPENSATION FOR THOSE HARMED BY IT IN THE PAST and also to prevent the use of chemical warfare. They did NOT call their efforts ANTI-WAR or PEACE MAKING!!!
Those African Americans who seek REPIRATIONS of past harm done in the name of slavery, started AFTER slavery was ABOLISHED and after civil rights laws were enacted in all states! And they state outright they are seeking reparations.
Say what you are doing and be honest about it, that's all. They are following in the shoes of their parent group OriginsAU which sought an APOLOGY for past deeds. What did that accomplish in terms of changing AU adoption laws? I challenge you or anyone to tell me.
I “blast” lies and untruths wherever they appear. I blast and expose those who use DECEPTIVE practices and newspeak to hide real agendas....no matter what the source!
I defend the INTEGRITY of those who work to change adoption and want it done with HONESTY in words and actions. If that is wrong, I stand accused!
momto4:
You call yourself anti-adoption. Good for you! That's HONEST. If OriginsUSA is anti-adoption stand up say so! I object to deceit.
Deceitful language is part of the problem of exploitation and coercion in adoption. I deplore it no matter who uses it. You do not fight deceit with deceit. It lessons one's credibility and my concern is that the credibility of OriginsUSA will be used against those of us fighting cleanly to get records open and make other changes in CURRENT ADOPTION PRACTICES.
SUZ: hope that's answers you to. If not, please write back, I post ALL comments and try and answer them as well.
I welcome and POST all comments and will try to reply to all. The purpose of AdopTalk is to talk and discuss issues of adoption reform.
That means I welcome a discussion/debate of the FACTS and issues in any post here. I have no “vendetta” and labeling me or my posts a such accomplished nothing in terms of the facts presented.
I challenge OriginsUSA or any member of OriginsUSA to tell me what in their main goal supports the preservation of families?
They don't even support or welcome those MOTHERS who surrendered our children and simply are used to using different a word. They do not support or welcome fathers or adoptees, and they certainly do not support or wlecome adoptive parents - even those fighting on the RIGHT side of adoption reform!! That's counterproductive.
Where is the INDICATION (forget proof) that complaining about or "proving" events of the 50's to 70s will have any effect on current practice?
US veterans of Vietnam who campaigned against agent orange, did so to get COMPENSATION FOR THOSE HARMED BY IT IN THE PAST and also to prevent the use of chemical warfare. They did NOT call their efforts ANTI-WAR or PEACE MAKING!!!
Those African Americans who seek REPIRATIONS of past harm done in the name of slavery, started AFTER slavery was ABOLISHED and after civil rights laws were enacted in all states! And they state outright they are seeking reparations.
Say what you are doing and be honest about it, that's all. They are following in the shoes of their parent group OriginsAU which sought an APOLOGY for past deeds. What did that accomplish in terms of changing AU adoption laws? I challenge you or anyone to tell me.
I “blast” lies and untruths wherever they appear. I blast and expose those who use DECEPTIVE practices and newspeak to hide real agendas....no matter what the source!
I defend the INTEGRITY of those who work to change adoption and want it done with HONESTY in words and actions. If that is wrong, I stand accused!
momto4:
You call yourself anti-adoption. Good for you! That's HONEST. If OriginsUSA is anti-adoption stand up say so! I object to deceit.
Deceitful language is part of the problem of exploitation and coercion in adoption. I deplore it no matter who uses it. You do not fight deceit with deceit. It lessons one's credibility and my concern is that the credibility of OriginsUSA will be used against those of us fighting cleanly to get records open and make other changes in CURRENT ADOPTION PRACTICES.
SUZ: hope that's answers you to. If not, please write back, I post ALL comments and try and answer them as well.
# posted by Senior Mom @ 12:46 PM 
Comments:
<< Home
Mirah, you do not POST all comments. You didn't post mine. And no one from OUSA cares to debate anymore with you about this because you talk in circles and don't make sense. You and I went round and round in July and you wouldn't even agree to disagree. I prefer taking action, not continuing to quibble and debate constantly like you do. Just because the action is what you recommend does not mean that I am not every bit as influential in making change as you.
...and by the way, although I didn't say the word in my last message to you that you refuse to post - you do have a vendetta.
And I've copied my message and shared it in the other groups for mothers that I'm in. It's easy to see that you are censoring.
Will you print this one?
...and by the way, although I didn't say the word in my last message to you that you refuse to post - you do have a vendetta.
And I've copied my message and shared it in the other groups for mothers that I'm in. It's easy to see that you are censoring.
Will you print this one?
# posted by 
: 12:54 PM
: 12:54 PM
"just another Mother with another opinion/viewpoint, no better than any other mother."
ABSULTELY RIGHT! never claimed to anything other than that!
And let's add another vote for vendetta and yet another accusation that I do NOT post comment, in a posted comment!
And yet another perosnal attack...this time it's my EFO.
But, gee whiz, guys, STILL no repsonse to isssues...hmmmm.
ABSULTELY RIGHT! never claimed to anything other than that!
And let's add another vote for vendetta and yet another accusation that I do NOT post comment, in a posted comment!
And yet another perosnal attack...this time it's my EFO.
But, gee whiz, guys, STILL no repsonse to isssues...hmmmm.
Mirah says: I will not, however, repsond to false complaints and accusations about other groups and other issues, ESPECISLLY when supported by FACT or evidence!
Excuse me? your initial post was entitled OUSA and it was provative and filled with false accusations and complaints about a group. You can say that their group is not supported by fact or evidence, but that's your opinion. Yet you are surprised when you get called on the fact that your blatant attempt to denigrate this group appears as what it is - quibbling and argumentative and yes, like a vendetta. I'm saying it appears that way - not name calling. This is why I gave up debating with you back in July. You take everything out of context and agree one minute and twist it the next.
Secondly, you did not post either of my posts until I posted for the 2nd time asking you why you had again responded on your blog that people thought you had a vendetta and addressed my concerns, but had not allowed my post? It sounded to me that my post prompted your reply, therfore I mentioned that I was saving copies of my responses. Just a little experiment....
But miraculously, both of my posts suddenly appeared within minutes. If you say that was a coincidence, I'll take your word for it. It just seemed to be curious timing.
My telling you that I will not quibble and debate when I could be doing more productive things was a direct response to your asking us to debate something it seems no one is interested in but you.
Guess my point was that just because you wish to debate the differences between what OUSA is doing and what Mirah THINKS OUSA should be doing, doesn't mean anyone else cares to indulge you.
Mirah, this is not meant to be an insult but you have become emotionally DEAF. Your approach of telling us that we will not address the issues is a bullying tactic. The responders here are being direct and honest with you.
It's a moot debate - you repeatedly wish to compare apples to oranges.
Excuse me? your initial post was entitled OUSA and it was provative and filled with false accusations and complaints about a group. You can say that their group is not supported by fact or evidence, but that's your opinion. Yet you are surprised when you get called on the fact that your blatant attempt to denigrate this group appears as what it is - quibbling and argumentative and yes, like a vendetta. I'm saying it appears that way - not name calling. This is why I gave up debating with you back in July. You take everything out of context and agree one minute and twist it the next.
Secondly, you did not post either of my posts until I posted for the 2nd time asking you why you had again responded on your blog that people thought you had a vendetta and addressed my concerns, but had not allowed my post? It sounded to me that my post prompted your reply, therfore I mentioned that I was saving copies of my responses. Just a little experiment....
But miraculously, both of my posts suddenly appeared within minutes. If you say that was a coincidence, I'll take your word for it. It just seemed to be curious timing.
My telling you that I will not quibble and debate when I could be doing more productive things was a direct response to your asking us to debate something it seems no one is interested in but you.
Guess my point was that just because you wish to debate the differences between what OUSA is doing and what Mirah THINKS OUSA should be doing, doesn't mean anyone else cares to indulge you.
Mirah, this is not meant to be an insult but you have become emotionally DEAF. Your approach of telling us that we will not address the issues is a bullying tactic. The responders here are being direct and honest with you.
It's a moot debate - you repeatedly wish to compare apples to oranges.
# posted by : 4:10 PM
: 4:10 PM
I post comments as I receive them and MIGHT take a break from my computer to eat or pee at the second one comes in.
...and, if anyone has not noticed, I post comments that DISAGREE with me, or make no sense whatesover to me, or whatever... because that is how one is fair, honest, OPEN and attempt to conduct a debate.
I will continue to post comments as they arrive, but will not longer continue to comment back until antyhign said deals with FACTS or ISSUES. Please document your "facts" with links AS DID I, or cute reference that can be verified! thank you.
I will continue to post comments as they arrive, but will not longer continue to comment back until antyhign said deals with FACTS or ISSUES. Please document your "facts" with links AS DID I, or cute reference that can be verified! thank you.
Origins AU did not seek an inquiry for the purpose of an apology. Not by a log shot. We called for that inquiry to prove that the routine adopti practices were illegal and unethical. We achieved that. Now we are in the Courts demanding restitution for the psychiatric injury those illegal adoption practices created.
# posted by : 1:49 AM
: 1:49 AM
While there are a couple of thoughtful responses to Mirah's blog such as the explainations by anonymous, I find it chilling that there are those posting replies to Mirah's blog who commit the egegious act of attacking her personally, and not the points she addresses.
Carol C provides a glimpse into the nastier paradigm of adoption reform with her incessant personal attacks. The specious assertion that she does not, or will not, debate is lo9st with her debate, not on issues, but on the person.
Reading the responses confirms my perception that Origins USA is an organization best avoided.
Post a Comment
Carol C provides a glimpse into the nastier paradigm of adoption reform with her incessant personal attacks. The specious assertion that she does not, or will not, debate is lo9st with her debate, not on issues, but on the person.
Reading the responses confirms my perception that Origins USA is an organization best avoided.
# posted by : 11:14 PM
: 11:14 PM << Home
