squeegee !hbZVTk6JYc replied with this 14 years ago, 1 minute later, 40 minutes after the original post[^][v]#372,214
But that's stupid, it'd be like teasing a kid because his parents didn't get divorced. Just because it's unusual doesn't mean it's a reason not to have kids.
Anonymous A (OP) replied with this 14 years ago, 10 minutes later, 51 minutes after the original post[^][v]#372,217
@previous (squeegee !hbZVTk6JYc)
Yes, and we still let Mormons and people with stupid names adopt.
squeegee !hbZVTk6JYc replied with this 14 years ago, 1 minute later, 53 minutes after the original post[^][v]#372,218
@previous (A)
That's true. And single women, they can adopt.
buspup !!x+kkCmnF4 joined in and replied with this 14 years ago, 4 hours later, 5 hours after the original post[^][v]#372,251
@372,205 (TheSheep !kJ.A4PF7.k)
I'd ask children about how they'd rather live. Two same sex parents with enough money to adopt, or in a group home, until they're kicked to the streets at the age of eighteen. Most children are not adopted, and here you have a group of people, who would love to be parents. It makes me sad about how religion warps some people, and allows them to think that having gay parents is worse than having no parents.
(Edited 3 minutes later.)
buspup !!x+kkCmnF4 double-posted this 14 years ago, 4 minutes later, 5 hours after the original post[^][v]#372,253
@372,218 (squeegee !hbZVTk6JYc)
Why wont they let single men adopt?
Anonymous A (OP) replied with this 14 years ago, 1 minute later, 5 hours after the original post[^][v]#372,254
@previous (buspup !!x+kkCmnF4)
Single men can adopt.
Anonymous G joined in and replied with this 14 years ago, 1 hour later, 7 hours after the original post[^][v]#372,270
@372,251 (buspup !!x+kkCmnF4) > Most children are not adopted
Source?
buspup !!x+kkCmnF4 replied with this 14 years ago, 12 hours later, 19 hours after the original post[^][v]#372,358
@previous (G)
Are you kidding me? Now I know that you are Mountainman. I dont care what it's like in Australia, but we have many, many children in America who are never adopted. Give me a few minutes, and I'll post some links, even though weve had this conversation multiple times now.
beckyderp !CaTLdYmooc joined in and replied with this 14 years ago, 1 minute later, 19 hours after the original post[^][v]#372,359
@previous (buspup !!x+kkCmnF4)
They don't get adopted because they are little shits. Thanks.
buspup !!x+kkCmnF4 replied with this 14 years ago, 1 minute later, 19 hours after the original post[^][v]#372,362
@previous (beckyderp !CaTLdYmooc)
Many of them are little boys, fake becky. Good job at fucking over your own gender. loldamn
beckyderp !CaTLdYmooc replied with this 14 years ago, 1 minute later, 19 hours after the original post[^][v]#372,363
@previous (buspup !!x+kkCmnF4)
My insult was gender neutral. Thanks.
buspup !!x+kkCmnF4 replied with this 14 years ago, 1 minute later, 19 hours after the original post[^][v]#372,368
@previous (beckyderp !CaTLdYmooc)
It pertains to many little boys who grow up in the system. But you dont care about them. Stay sweet, you walking piece of human garbage.
beckyderp !CaTLdYmooc replied with this 14 years ago, 45 seconds later, 19 hours after the original post[^][v]#372,369
@previous (buspup !!x+kkCmnF4)
It also pretains to little girls. I did not specify a gender.
buspup !!x+kkCmnF4 replied with this 14 years ago, 2 minutes later, 19 hours after the original post[^][v]#372,370
@previous (beckyderp !CaTLdYmooc)
So you're okay with hurting little boys, as long as girls get hurt as well? lol that's cute. I've actually seen a lot of that from MRA's. They don't mind fucking over their own, as long as they can take females with them.
beckyderp !CaTLdYmooc replied with this 14 years ago, 3 minutes later, 19 hours after the original post[^][v]#372,371
@previous (buspup !!x+kkCmnF4)
I did not specify genders.
buspup !!x+kkCmnF4 replied with this 14 years ago, 1 minute later, 19 hours after the original post[^][v]#372,372
@372,270 (G)
49,271 aged out of the system in 2010.
TTEH !JXsxEkDBLs joined in and replied with this 14 years ago, 7 seconds later, 19 hours after the original post[^][v]#372,373
@372,370 (buspup !!x+kkCmnF4) > So you're okay with hurting little boys, as long as girls get hurt as well?
Anything else would be discrimination, right?
buspup !!x+kkCmnF4 replied with this 14 years ago, 56 seconds later, 19 hours after the original post[^][v]#372,374
@previous (TTEH !JXsxEkDBLs)
Or we could just not hurt anyone.
buspup !!x+kkCmnF4 double-posted this 14 years ago, 2 minutes later, 20 hours after the original post[^][v]#372,377
beckyderp !CATLDyPIBQ (OP) replied with this 14 years ago, 11 minutes later, 20 hours after the original post[^][v]#372,386
@previous (buspup !!x+kkCmnF4)
I think I'm going to adopt my first kid, as a test run. I can blame the birth parents if the kid turns out badly. Maybe even a foster kid, you get paid for that.
Anonymous G replied with this 14 years ago, 1 minute later, 20 hours after the original post[^][v]#372,388
@372,372 (buspup !!x+kkCmnF4)
nice factoid but please prove proof of your claim that most children are not adopted
@372,377 (buspup !!x+kkCmnF4)
nice factoid but please prove proof of your claim that most children are not adopted
Anonymous G double-posted this 14 years ago, 47 seconds later, 20 hours after the original post[^][v]#372,389
@372,386 (beckyderp !CATLDyPIBQ)
Apparently the biological parents are a better guide to how the kid will turn out then the adoptive parents
buspup !!x+kkCmnF4 replied with this 14 years ago, 33 seconds later, 20 hours after the original post[^][v]#372,390
@372,388 (G)
No source that you're MM? Well kindly ask the mods to confirm. If you arent he, than it shouldnt be a problem.
(Edited 10 seconds later.)
beckyderp !CATLDyPIBQ (OP) replied with this 14 years ago, 7 seconds later, 20 hours after the original post[^][v]#372,391
@372,389 (G)
nice factoid but please prove proof of your claim that the biological parents are a better guide to how the kid will turn out then the adoptive parents
buspup !!x+kkCmnF4 replied with this 14 years ago, 3 minutes later, 20 hours after the original post[^][v]#372,393
Anonymous G double-posted this 14 years ago, 1 minute later, 22 hours after the original post[^][v]#372,432
@372,391 (beckyderp !CATLDyPIBQ)
I'm sorry, I can't find anything on google. I heard the study cited in a speech, but I can't remember who the researchers were.
Anonymous G triple-posted this 14 years ago, 29 seconds later, 22 hours after the original post[^][v]#372,433
@372,393 (buspup !!x+kkCmnF4)
nice factoid but please prove proof of your claim that most children are not adopted
Anonymous G quadruple-posted this 14 years ago, 20 seconds later, 22 hours after the original post[^][v]#372,434
@372,399 (buspup !!x+kkCmnF4)
nice factoid but please prove proof of your claim that most children are not adopted
Anonymous G quintuple-posted this 14 years ago, 16 seconds later, 22 hours after the original post[^][v]#372,435
@372,404 (buspup !!x+kkCmnF4)
Please stay on topic
Anonymous K joined in and replied with this 14 years ago, 1 hour later, 1 day after the original post[^][v]#372,469
It turns out that specific statistics are difficult to locate for this.
beckyderp !CATLDyPIBQ (OP) replied with this 14 years ago, 2 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^][v]#372,471
Anonymous L joined in and replied with this 14 years ago, 24 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^][v]#372,479
I was adopted. I'm surviving.
Anonymous K replied with this 14 years ago, 36 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^][v]#372,489
@372,471 (beckyderp !CATLDyPIBQ)
Specifically, statistics on adoption rates and what "adoption" means in any given report. If, say, you were trying to look at adoption rates to compare them with the number of children that are waiting for adoption, looking at raw adoption rates would be problematic. The raw data would include children who were adopted by a relative or other non-blood family member such as a step-parent to secure legal guardianship; it would include adoptions resulting from surrogate parent arrangements; it would include intercountry adoptions that would inflate the numbers if you are comparing them with rates for in-country children; and it would include other types of adoptions (arranged, tribal/customary, etc.) that may or may not be relevant to what you are trying to learn from the data.
Aside from having to sift though the adoption data, there is the problem of counting children. On a world-wide scale, rough estimates are the best we are going to get. No one is wandering around cataloging and tracking all the homeless and orphaned children in Asia. Even if we limit ourselves to the US, where a lot of statistics are available, raw numbers of children "in the system" include a large number of children who aren't necessarily in need of adoption. (e.g. many are reunited with their parents, have relatives that can provide foster care, are old enough to emancipate, etc.) The raw numbers of children "in the system" also don't include those that age-out each year and still omit some homeless and runaway children.