November 26, 2018
Along with being against Jews, people of color, women, homosexuals and all the other things right-wingers are traditionally against, I am also against some things you’ve probably not ever even thought of being against before.
Such as home schooling and pit bulls.
I am also strongly against stranger adoption.
The other day writing about how the traitor John Roberts had trafficked two white Irish children through South America, I said:
Please note that “adoption” is not a real thing, and the correct term is “kidnapped” or “bought.” Raising children that are not related to you is an unnatural act. It used to be if people couldn’t have children they would get one from their relatives to raise – a niece or nephew – the real parents save a bit of money on raising the kid and the aunt and uncle are okay devoting money and energy on someone who is part of their own family stock. Raising some total stranger’s children is the parenting equivalent of sodomy.
Some stranger adoption supporters protested in the comments.
One person said:
It is an honor to take in a white child and provide them a home and opportunity to become something great. We should always look after our own if they deserve it.
To which I replied:
Flowery sentimentalist bullshit shouldn’t enter into far-right discussions of social issues. Or any real world issues for that matter. You can save the “honor of my aryan children” greeting-card tier talking points for propaganda to the masses – to support things that have already been worked out through logic – but using it to defend concepts in its own right is a horrible practice.
Stranger adoption is white slavery and it leads to severe mental illness, even without the abuse which is generally always ensured – even if they don’t adopt the children for the purpose of abuse, they become abusive as they wake up to the fact that they are spending resources on someone they have no genetic stake in.
Where are these people’s families? Where are these “adopted babies” coming from?
We used to have orphanages of course, but those numbers were tiny compared to the modern adoption/foster system.
This is an industry, it is sick, and I don’t understand how anyone could endorse something so disgusting.
Unless of course [insert WN version of a tumblr poem].
Then someone else said:
Maybe it is good for the white race to have white orphans adopted by white people…
To which I replied:
Who are the orphans? Orphans used to be street children of hookers or survivors of a family that was wiped out by a disease. This is my point: the adoption industry is an industry of child trafficking. Even African “adoption” babies are being either kidnapped for trafficking or sold.
Stranger adoption is a bizarre, sick concept.
And actually no: orphanages were better. At least there you’re with a bunch of other kids who are in the same fucked up situation, and you’ve got a bunch of nuns looking after you who aren’t going to sodomize you and are less likely to beat you than adoptive parents.
Sterile couples should do some form of artificial insemination if they want kids. But that isn’t encouraged in our society, because there is an “adoption” child-trafficking industry that is making billions of dollars (I don’t know, but I would assume it is run by Jews, as human trafficking generally is).
As I say: the word “adoption” shouldn’t be used, this is trafficking – even if the mother is willing to sell her child, why should she be allowed to do that? What kind of a society engages in this sort of behavior?
Adoption encourages child trafficking, it encourages people to sell their children. There is no situation in which this is healthy for the child, because it cannot genetically bond with either parent, and the parents themselves also cannot bond with the children properly.
Most famous serial killers were adoptees, and adoptees are 15 times more likely to commit murder than natural children.
Excerpted from National Criminal Justice System, NCJS Journal Abstract, “Adoption & Murder” (from Psychology and Law” p.274-280, 1997, Santiago Redondo and Vicente Garrido et al, NCJS 176632)“…although adopted children commit murders more often than commonly believed, there is resistance to making an issue of this fact. This may be because of the secrecy associated with many adoptions and the failure of criminal justice agencies to record the nature of an offender’s family background. From a legal posture, an adopted child is simply the child of his adoptive parents. …the psychodynamics of adoption are easily overlooked in forensic mental health evaluations.”
Excerpted from “Adoption Forensics: The Connection Between Adoption and Murder” by David Kirschner, PhD, “Of the 500 estimated serial killers in U.S. history, 16 percent were adopted as children. Adoptees, he found, were 15 times more likely to kill one or both of their adoptive parents than biological children.”
These negative outcomes include adopted serial killers such as David Berkowitz (Son of Sam), Ted Bundy (Co-ed Killer) Kenneth Bianchi (Hillside Strangler), Brandi Lynn Hungerford (Black Widow), Catherine Gypsy (Manson Family Murders). There are 36 documented female serial killers, all of whom have been adopted. Despite the high number of serial and mass murders who are adopted, there are many adoptees that murder their adopters and often entire adoptive family.
The foster system is even worse than the adoption system, as these parents are being paid to take the kids and regularly molest and beat them.
Again: orphanages run by nuns make the most sense.
Christian Incompetence Again to Blame
The Christians have done a terrible thing by encouraging and empowering the adoption system as a response to abortion.
They failed to stop the legalization of abortion, just as they failed to stop the Civil War, desegregation, school integration, women’s suffrage, WWI, WWII, Jewish bankers, hippies, feminism, Jews banning prayer in schools, black people, the Jews (in general), pornography, nonwhite immigration, homosexuals, homosexual marriage, sex education in schools, homosexual sex education in schools, trannies and everything else that they ever said they were trying to stop.
Thus far, I am not aware of a single thing that American Christians have not rolled over on. As right-wing opposition to Jews, American Christianity has been a caricature of political impotence, to the point where they now represent the biggest allies of the Jews, and believe the people that their religion says are cursed by God and are evil are “God’s chosen people.” We could analyze that whole issue another time I’m sure.
(Just to be clear, I’m talking specifically about the American sectarian post-protestant Christian phenomenon; historical Christianity in General has pushed back against Jews and their agendas, as well as Moslems, women, homosexuals, etc.)
So after failing to stop abortion, they decided the best thing to do was create a massive global child-trafficking industry.
This was purely reactionary, as a way to try and emotionally blackmail women into not having abortions, saying they can give it up for adoption instead. Again, they made things worse.
This is really what put the money into the adoption industry, making it a global phenomenon of child-trafficking.
These Christians also were the ones who came up with the lunatic idea of trafficking black children from Africa for adoption. I am primarily/exclusively concerned about white people, but still, trafficking children from Africa is cruel and unnatural.
It’s cruel to the blacks and it is cruel to other white children in the family (these families that do this usually have natural children, and adopt the blacks as a social signaler).
The solution to abortion is to ban abortion. Failing so miserably to protect a policy that had almost universal support and then coming up with a solution that leads to global cruelty and abuse of children, as well as a gigantic social problem – and then eventually led to homosexuals “adopting” infant boys to rape – is just such a level of failure that it is virtually impossible to even process.
“Whoops, shot myself in the foot – better go ahead and shoot myself in the head!”
…or some better analogy.