The problem I have with "no middle men" is the outstanding level of abuse that would go unchecked until after the abuse is reported, if it ever is.  

 This means buying children, prostituting children, selling children.  Sex offenders could adopt children, know abusers could adopt children, drug cartels etc.

 The system in the US is not exactly the best, but to remove any form of counseling, investigation or mitigation to abuse or poor placement in general is not in my opinion the best method.

Eegore wrote on 12/05/19 at 15:20:24:


Really....you are a very queer one, I tell ya.

Abortion WAS the reference, topic....mercy dude.

Apparently you dissect every post/reply I make, and you have never noticed how I highlight in bold text that is not of my own scripting.....????

And again, you appear to give me way too much weight, doubly so, in a domain that you have shared makes no difference..... yet you want to send me "proof"...... of things you might have said, or done.....

Why do you care?

Its queer, dude.....I think maybe you are a facade.

Are you honest with yourself?

raydawg wrote on 12/06/19 at 11:54:03:


This is a hollow and dangerous equivocation.   The record shows that sexual abuse of children is a common threat that must be accounted for; the incidence among fostered children is many magnitudes greater than children with biological parents; the rates of general abuse among adopted children are also higher.   Moreover, the constituents of the adopted family are indicative of abuse prevalence.

No, not everyone is going to rape or otherwise abuse a child- but enough people do reliably that to not take precaution would make us all party to that harm.   I don't know what your motive is here, Ray, but the degree to which you are beyond your knowledge is evident.   This is not an area in which we can tolerate political games.

Surely not every White is a racist.   Plenty of folks are, though, and will act to infringe on the free rights of their fellow citizens.   Same for sexists.   Same for those wielding guns.    Not 'might', but will, predictably, so we take precautions, put tools in place to confront the consequences.

raydawg wrote on 12/06/19 at 11:49:03:


'Guy doesn't seem to care about what he writes- why should I?'  That's a question you inspire often, Ray.  Eventually, folks will just tune you out.  

"Apparently you dissect every post/reply I make, and you have never noticed how I highlight in bold text that is not of my own scripting.....????"

 Have you ever noticed I cross reference every single post I reply to, not just yours?  



"And again, you appear to give me way too much weight, doubly so, in a domain that you have shared makes no difference..... yet you want to send me "proof"...... of things you might have said, or done.....

Why do you care?"

 I'm not giving you any weight, I responded to your post.  I don't know what "proof" you are talking about.  If I provide information on a topic it can be verified, and I am always willing to provide the references, to anyone.  I don't just say stuff to hear myself talk.

 My opinion is that you copied and posted an article that was highly inaccurate, then said it's not on you because you only posted it and didn't type any of it yourself.  You clarified you do not reference information, but post it in bold, leaving us to go find it ourselves, which is good to know.  I rarely read these so the bold isn't something I'd notice.

 And yet still you refuse to acknowledge that I meant very specifically personal insults when I said they are "words on a screen" or that they should make no difference.  Exclusively and only personal insults with all other topics, ranges of communication or any other thing at all in the known universe being excluded.  You know that I use this forum in a shop and a rehabilitation program and that in itself should be enough to show the information is useful.  Personal insults are not.  Only personal insults.

 I was very specifically addressing personal insults and everyone here except you can acknowledge that.  I am sure everyone understands the "what do you care" tactic you are attempting and that it doesn't apply outside the context of personal insults.

Eegore wrote on 12/06/19 at 13:27:25:



It's a NO BRAINER to protect kids....that is the point.

Its the demagoguery that is BS, and counter productive.....
Like a budget reduction being reported as a cut, forcing people to eat dog food, etc
Like in race baiting, conservatives all wear white sheets over their heads....when in fact, presently its being reported Trump is getting over 35% of their vote, and climbing.....

If you do not understand irony, using it as a tool, then keep to your own lane of traffic, while others pass by......

OR....... if you really want to protect kids, at all cost, lets start with those in the womb.  

And we have how many abortion deaths ??? Lemme guess … 6 ???? no, more … oops my bad, maybe we should have these abortions on the border in those tent cities, so we can cry about dying babies under TRUMP.

Druck, I sound like Lindsey Graham, and I hate that fool.

And Adoptions would be done through CPS (child protective services) or the police or some other gubbamint entity, so they can screen for criminals, cartels, sex offenders. Duh … baby needs birth certificate and adoption papers, you would get that crap where ??? on Craigslist ? Yea, lets open an Adoption/Abortion section on craigslist.

Cool.
Srinath.