Pat Robertson Wouldn’t Adopt Foreign Children Because They Might Turn Out ‘Weird’

This man makes my head explode. Why does anyone still listen to Pat Robertson? He pretends to be a moral leader and a good Christian. But doesn’t that mean taking care of those in need, especially when they’re children?!

When asked by a viewer why she was having trouble finding a man willing to date her after finding out she had three adopted children from around the world, Robertson had this to say (emphasis mine):

YouTube Preview Image

A man doesn’t want to take on the United Nations, and this woman’s got all these various children and blended family. What is it? And you don’t know what problems there are. I’m serious. I got a dear friend with an adopted son, little kid from an orphanage down in Columbia. Child had brain damage. You know, grew up weird. And you just never know what’s been done to a child before you get that child, what kind of sexual abuse, what kind of cruelty, what kind of food deprivation, etc, etc, etc. So, you’re not a dog ’cause you don’t want to take on that kind of responsibility. You don’t have to take on someone else’s problems. I mean you really don’t. You can go help people, you can minister to people. We minister to orphans all over the world, thousands of them. We love orphans, we love helping people. But that doesn’t necessarily mean that I’m gonna take all of the orphans around the world into my home.

Ministering to orphans IS NOT helping them. It’s just about the most worthless thing you can do for them. And it may be quite psychologically harmful. “There’s this lovely god who is all-powerful but he’s obviously doing nothing to help you and neither will we.  Except to minister to you.”

How can Robertson have so little compassion for those with such great need? Yes, many children who need to be adopted have greater needs because of abuse they’ve experienced. And yes, not everyone is going to opt in for that kind of responsibility. But Robertson should be applauding this woman for her having a heart overflowing with love, for not caring that her’s is a “blended family.”

The advice she deserved is this: Start telling the men you’re dating about your adopted children upfront. Most of them won’t be interested but this knowledge will act as a filter for those not afraid of a challenge, for those who are filled with compassion and a desire to give to those in need. I hope she finds a man as loving and awesome as she is.

About Ericka M. Johnson

As a lover of science and reason, Ericka M. Johnson has an affinity for evolutionary biology and is the president of Seattle Atheists. She revels in any opportunity for a thoughtful debate on the meaning of life, the universe, and everything (especially over a pint.) Follow her on twitter @ErickaMJohnson

  • http://www.holytape.etsy.com Holytape

    I guess we are to stay off his lawn too.  He’s sound more and more off base.  He probably had these thoughts all his life, but knew enough to keep his mouth shut.  It sounds like his mental filter is impaired.  I would not be surprised to find out that he is in the early stages of alzheimer’s.

    • http://twitter.com/silo_mowbray Silo Mowbray

      I would happily give Robertson Alzheimer’s if it meant restoring Terry Pratchett’s mind. Mr. Pratchett delights people with his satire; Robertson just seeks to harm the Other.

  • Ida Know

    He’s doing these kids a favor by not adopting them and thus not subjecting them to his warped and hateful worldview.

  • Justin

    People still listen to him because he still gets media attention for his inane ramblings. If no one reported on it every time he said something stupid, he would cease to be relevant.

    • Coyotenose

       That isn’t how it works. When these people are allowed to get away with their words and actions, they get bolder. That is how bullies, tyrants and bigots are. They are reined in by exposure, even while they spin criticism to help them mine gullible elderly people for donations.

  • http://twitter.com/nathanjreese Nathan Reese

    Wow, the co-host had a valid opinion, and after hearing Pat’s bigoted view she just says, “that’s true”. No, it’s not true. Tell him he’s a racist bigot and stop blowing him off like he’s your crazy grandpa. He’s the crazy grandpa that just happens to have a tv show for all of the world to hear his bigoted views.

  • http://twitter.com/enuma enuma

    Shorter: I don’t have to feel bad about doing nothing to improve the lives of these children as long as I tell them about Jesus because if they’re Saved, their lives will get better… after they die.

  • RSersen

    What I took from this:

    “Don’t allow abortions, don’t condone contraception – these are all god’s children! Adoption is always a viable alternative! Someone will give them a home. I mean, not me, of course. Hell no. But yeah, someone else, I’m sure.”

    Fuck Pat Robertson.  

    Also, would have loved to have seen the co-hosts reaction/response. At the beginning of the video she seemed quite firmly on the woman’s side, so I’m sure she reacted to Pat’s drivel with a healthy dose of “wtf.” Or at least I hope so.

    • Octoberfurst

       Exactly right RSersen! I get so sick and tired of hearing right-wing Christians say how abortion is horrible and needs to be banned and that contraceptives are evil, blahh, blahh, blahh.  And they say that women with unexpected pregnancies  should simply put their kids up for adoption. Of course THEY don’t want to adopt kids. Especially foreign kids.  Let someone else do it. Hypocrites!

      • Rwlawoffice

        Really, what facts do you have to support this ridiculous statement that there are no Christians or others who would adopt children instead ofcseeingbthem killed? This is nothing more than an attempt to justify the killing of unborn children. Tell me the statistics of all these mothers who would not have aborted their babies if only there was someone to adopt them.

        As for Christians not adopting foreign children you are flat out wrong. Thousands of them do it every year.

  • Pete084

    What a vile old man. Lets be brutally honest here, the sooner Pat Robertson pops his clogs the better!

  • LesterBallard

    What bothers me is these fuckers are always saying “don’t have an abortion, put your baby up for adoption. I mean, I don’t want the little fucker, but listen to what I say anyway”.

  • Justin (SC)

    We don’t know that the 700 Club viewer he’s addressing is loving or awesome, unless there is more information that was not presented here.  She IS asking Pat Robertson for advice.

  • http://profiles.google.com/davydd.norris David Philip Norris

    Wow, a two-fer! He managed to blame the woman for her dating issues AND insult every family that has ever adopted from a foreign country. This just goes to show that religion hardens the heart and breeds intolerance, fear and indifference.

    • Katiefickey

      i completely agree with you. Pat is an idiot. I am an adoptive mother and a believer in jesus. And I am embarrassed that this man still has a public voice and pretends that he is a voice for many. I agree that religion itself can breed awful things. But Jesus is not about religion and I am confident that He will deal with that man some day. 

      • Annalemma

        I’m an adoptive mother as well, but an atheist. Pat Robertson is a fucking asshole. My little girl is the sweetest and smartest kid I know. Jesus won’t deal with Robertson as we no longer exist when we die. All we can hope is that Pat Robertson’s time on his show comes to an end soon.

        • Mike

          Omit ‘on his show’ from the last sentence, and you’re there.

        • http://profiles.google.com/davydd.norris David Philip Norris

          It’s like Julia Sweeney says in her show: “You mean Hitler—Hitler
          just died? You mean nobody sat him down and said ‘You fucked up, buddy, and now
          you’re going to spend an eternity in HELL!’” I’m an atheist as well, which has changed my whole position on things like capital punishment. The only retribution for us is on this side of life. On the other side is, to the best of our knowledge, annihilation. Pat Robertson can rot in his cesspool of hate for all I care. What matters is stopping him from hurting innocent people and from hurting those who don’t know that they can think for themselves and think that Robertson speaks for God.

      • cipher

        The problem, Katie, is that he is a voice for many. Millions hang upon his every word. If it were only a matter of Pat and a few others like him saying stupid things once in a while to which no one paid any attention, we hell-bound atheists and God-cursed liberals wouldn’t be so up in arms.

        Liberal and moderate Christians claim to disapprove of reactionary fundamentalists like Pat, but apart from Jim Wallis opening his mouth once in a while, Christians have pretty much stood by and said nothing while they’ve commandeered society – all the while crying about how persecuted and victimized they are.

  • Margaret Whitestone

    Only American White Heterosexual Christians are fully human.  Everyone else is broken, weird, perverted, etc.  But Robertson is still good enough to proselytize to them because in his mind that’s a charitable and noble act. 

  • Michael Brice

    This man is a despicable human being.

  • Mrs Schaarschmidt

    To speak to the woman’s original question, I found the sentence “if they were my own biological children that came with child support” very telling. I suspect that the issue may be more financial than that of a “blended family” issue.

  • http://snigsfoot.blogspot.in/ Rob Crompton

    This man is just heartless. Only a short while before reading this I was talking with a friend who knows a thing or two about adopting problem kids. He was looking pointer on where to turn for advice about how to help his son (adopted) who is newly out of prison after a long sentence. This guy loves his son and still wants so desperately to get him all the help he needs. My opinion of Pat Robertson? Nothing but contempt.

  • Harry

    Oh man, that this heinous creature is still around. I first heard his name in 1986 when I read an interview with Frank Zappa. He said that he didn’t want a religous man in the White House or anywhere near the red button.

    That was the time that I realized that religion is a scourge on the US. I live in Europe and it is really hard for me to comprehend that vile and nasty people like Pat have a voice and get to be on TV. In Europe they stand on street corners, spouting this nonsense to deaf ears and selling pens from a cup.

    Zappa wrote a song dedicated to shit like this called Jesus thinks you’re a Jerk. It had the ominous line “What if Pat gets in the White House?” 25 years later Frank is dead, Pat is allowed to be antisocial on prime time tv, and people like him are very near to the White House and the red button. Now it’s a man who wears magic underpants who is up for the precidency. “What if Mitt gets in the White House?”

    Here’s Frank’s final words in that song; who would think they were relevant today?

    “What if Mitt gets in the White House?
    Now, wouldn’t that sort of qualify as an American Tragedy?
    Especially if they cover it up, sayin’ ‘Jesus told it to me’
    I hope we never see that day in The Land of The Free”

    • http://profile.yahoo.com/47IDX2QAR6VU6ZAILFU6I23ACQ Joseph

      Almost 20 years after his death, and Frank’s social commentary is still as relevant today as it was when he was alive.  That is very sad, when you think about it… I’m sure Frank would have hoped that this would no longer be a concern in 2012. 

  • scinquiry

    How very christ like of him (whatever that means – perhaps he would like to just banish them straight to hell because they probably weren’t told of the wonderful power of christ and therefore didn’t believe in his super-magic powers.  Powers that could supposedly save them, but that wouldn’t be part of his plan.  Argh!!!!!….I digress…). 

    My wife and I are in process of adopting a special needs child from China.  As atheists/secular humanists/skeptics,  we recognize you have only one chance at life.  To be discarded as a human being because you were born of unfortunate circumstances or “weird”, as Robertson defines these children, is absolutely inhuman. 

    • Annalemma

      We adopted a little girl from China three years ago. Adopting her was the best thing me and my husband ever did. As for Pat Roberston, what a hypocritical asshole.

  • Kodie

    This made me so angry! He’s kind of right, though, I think, when someone already has children, getting together with someone who might be put off for whatever reason, even the same reasons Pat Robertson says! I don’t think the reasons are so off-base, even if I also think it’s wrong. I think it’s wrong to suggest there’s automatically something wrong, that you are taking on someone else’s problems, but some kids from some countries are known to have emotional problems, and it is better, I THINK, for someone to admit they don’t want to get into it, especially if they are weak, than give an effort and not be up for it. People have those same reasons for not wanting to be with a partner who knows the other parent of their children, and you wouldn’t want to force that kind of person to be with you!

    My feelings are someone who is Christian asking for advice from Pat Robertson with these kind of problems, it is an adequate excuse he’s giving, it’s normal, it’s not good, but it’s someone telling you why these men aren’t staying interested for probable reasons they aren’t staying interested – is it wrong to tell someone that?

    I’m also a woman who has been involved with two mentally ill men. The first one had a pyschotic break after we lived together, and I still tried to make it work. The second one was bipolar and told me on the second date, and at the time, I assumed that was being medicated adequately; I did not want to take care of a patient, but I ended up taking care of a patient, and it did not end well. It’s wrong to suggest these children automatically have problems, but it’s an adequate explanation why the men did not want to stick around to raise them. It’s not good, but was Pat Robertson dishonest in a plausible explanation why these men did not want to stick around? He did make it sound like it was the woman’s fault for adopting orphans (I don’t know that they’re technically orphans) and expecting good Christian men (if those were the fish in her pond) to put their money where their mouth is. Children who are born and need parenting – that’s where it really makes me angry, that he is excusing them for wanting their own non-weird children. But if I had met a guy who went cold over that fact, I would also not particularly despair that they were in the wrong. What is she supposed to do now? He doesn’t offer advice for that, and it’s kind of too late. I would not want to be with a man who was not into the whole package and was scared easily. It will probably be difficult, as wrong as that is, for her to find someone to go down that road she’s already on. It’s just very specific, and I think too nerve-wracking for the men she wanted to date so far.

    If most of you may have a partner already, how many of you sincerely want to adopt some child from a foreign country and how many of your partners are completely with you 100%?

    • scinquiry

       My wife are in the process of adopting a special needs child from China.  As a child, many of my friends were adopted, as well as my first cousin.  I knew that when the time came for me to start a family, adoption would be my first choice.  Before we got married we had lengthy discussions on what it means to have children and what methods we would ultimately choose.  For me, there was no hesitation to choose adoption as our first choice in starting a family.  For my wife, she felt the same way.  With millions of children in need of love and good homes, it was a no brainer. 

    • amycas

       My partner and I talk regularly about adopting a child. We want to have one of our own and then adopt one. We haven’t discussed if we want to adopt from a foreign country or not. I was thinking of fostering first.

      • http://annainca.blogspot.com/ Anna

        I think wanting to adopt is great, but just FYI, the phrase “one of our own” drives me crazy! It’s the kind of language that everyone uses and takes for granted that contributes to the idea that adopted children are not the same as biological children.

    • http://annainca.blogspot.com/ Anna

      For me, honestly, adoption is the first choice. I’ve never wanted to be pregnant. My partner and I have talked about it many times and plan to adopt in the future. We’re not sure if we will go the domestic or international route, but we’d be fine with either.

      However, I do think our views make us part of a minority. Most people want biological children. I’ve never really understood why, but they do. And I think American society in general is biased against adoption, so you’re only going to get people who are committed to the idea who are willing to adopt.

  • Kamaka

    Man, I love Pat R.

    If ever there was a True Christian™, he’s the one!

  • Paul_Robertson

    I hate to say it, but he has a point. I think that much of the anger in this thread is because people know that Pat’s right about why the men are leaving, and they want to change that fact through sheer force of will. It’s all well and good to declare that people should be generous and selfless, but a relationships are tough enough at the best of times; every day people dump/reject other people for far less reason than this. What’s more, there are some things that are just red flags for general freakiness, and a single woman, with not one, but three kids adopted from overseas? I’m sorry, but that rates an “Angelina Jolie” on the freak scale. 

    • Philbert

      Whatever point he may have is outweighed by the massive hypocrisy. He and his ilk use adoption as a canard when they want to ban abortion, and then say stuff like this.

      • Paul_Robertson

         Actually, Pat’s being pretty consistent here. While I think he’s wrong about abortion in general, he’s certainly correct that a baby put up for adoption in the USA can expect to be quickly adopted by loving parents. You seem to be suggesting that in pointing out this demand, he should necessarily applaud any and all adoptive parents, but that’s never been his shtick. For starters, we’re talking about a single woman, and we all know that Pat doesn’t believe that children should exist outside of a heterosexual marriage. Secondly, if you look at the baggage he’s describing, he’s clearly talking about older children, as overseas adoptions often are. That means that no abortion was averted by the child being put up for adoption. Again a standard right-wing line in the sand: life begins at conception but ends at birth. Thirdly, this is his standard treatment of any foreign issue: foreign suffering exists so that American Christians have somewhere to go for their mission trips.

        As an aside, I am deeply uncomfortable with the whole concept of overseas adoption. Too many of these kids aren’t orphans, but rather children of parents who can’t afford them (cf Madonna’s adoption). It feels like we’ve created a situation where these people are struggling to make ends meet and then we buy their children from them. Doesn’t feel right to me.

        • Philbert

          Healthy white American babies might get adopted speedily, but Robertson does not even get off the hook on the overseas issue since the Christian right is happy to undermine access to abortion and contraception in other countries also. And someone would have to adopt the “weird” and the “blended” looking ones as well.

          • Paul_Robertson

             And someone would have to adopt the “weird” and the “blended” looking ones as well.
            Or they could make it possible for the birth parents to keep them…

        • nice_marmot

          No, he’s not correct: In the U.S. alone, there are always more children awaiting adoption than there are adoptive parents. Tens of thousands every year.
          Pat Robertson is a vile, petty, ignorant man – a truly horrible person and a complete fraud. Millions of children around the world are breathing a sigh of relief that he’s not looking to adopt.

          • Paul_Robertson

            Wow… I’d hate to meet Angry_Marmot…

            Regarding your adoption stats, are you talking newborns? If so, got a source for that? If not, then it’s not really relevant to the abortion question is it?

    • RobertoTheChi

      The only thing “freaky” about this woman is she obviously has an imaginary friend in the sky and she asks Pat Robertson for advice.

  • Tainda

    Here’s my advice to the lady “If they don’t want your kids, you don’t want them”  I don’t get women who think that they NEED a man anyway.  I lived with a man for 4 years and things were just dandy until my daughter turned 13 and started turning into the typical teenage girl.  He said “We are great but I’m not going to deal with your daughter anymore.  I will just act like she’s not here”  I told him to get the fuck out of my house.  Up front I tell the men I date “My daughter comes first”  Though now that she’s grown and out the house it’s all for me lol

    And my nephew is adopted from Russia and I love that little bugger :P  Robertson needs a smack in the face a few times

    • Chakolate

       Yup – this is what Dan Savage calls a superpower.  Those kids give her the superpower of being able to tell right off the bat if the guy is worth the trouble.  Just tell him and Bingo!  you know whether he’s a grownup or not.

  • DivaJess

    As a born again Christian I would like to apologize for Pat’s ignorance and the Network’s lack of balls to pull him from the air. I am shocked and horrified at his comments and must stress that his words DO NOT express the heart of God at all. Pat needs to be pulled from the show and just live out the remainder of his years without a camera or microphone anywhere near him.

    • Lagerbaer

       Ah, so he’s not a True Christian™? Apparently, enough people think he is to keep him on TV.

    • amycas

       Go tell him that. In fact get all of your Christian friends together, get your churches together, band together and make a national organization to tell Pat Robertson he’s wrong. Make your voices heard, because right now you’re allowing the crazies to take the stage.

      • cipher

        In fact get all of your Christian friends together, get your churches
        together, band together and make a national organization to tell Pat
        Robertson he’s wrong. Make your voices heard, because right now you’re
        allowing the crazies to take the stage.

        Enthusiastically seconded.

  • Robertburns3

    And my wife wonders why I hate Christians so much. Its because of scum like this. BTW – my 3 year old from Ethiopia is more of a man that this dick.

  • ImRike

    Why would she ask Robertson a question like that? Robertson? Maybe that’s why she can’t find a husband!

  • http://www.agnostic-library.com/ma/ PsiCop

    Re: “Why does anyone still listen to Pat Robertson?

    That seems a natural question to ask. Marion Robertson is so nutty, and says such outrageous, lunatic stuff, that one immediately wonders who bothers listening to him. If one assumes him to be part of a “lunatic fringe” of American society and Christianity, it makes absolutely no sense that the guy would even still be on the air any more. He’d long ago have drifted off into oblivion.

    I’d suggest the answer to this conundrum is not to wonder why this “lunatic fringe” character is still around … but rather, to concede that he’s not “fringe” at all. A lot of people think the way he does. Lots of folks like hearing this stuff from him. His views are not those of a tiny number of fanatical extremists, but rather, are held — to one degree or another — by a much larger bloc of society.

    The sooner we all understand it, the sooner we can deal with the fact that a significant proportion of Americans are basically militant religionists whose minds were lost long ago, who can no longer be reasoned with, and whose views can no longer be accepted as having the slightest validity. There are millions of these folk, perhaps even tens of millions. They exert an enormous amount of influence, but we can no longer afford to let them run the show any more.

    So the short answer to the above question is, “Because lots of Americans think he’s right!” And that, my friends, is frightening.

    • Stuart Resnick

      I’ve lived over 50 years in America. No militant religionist has ever forced me to do anything. Not even once. I went to a public school system that taught values offensive to many religious people… yet those religious people were forced to pay for the public schools. I’ve never been forced to pay for their religous schools or institutions.

      I don’t doubt that there are stupid people in America, nor do I care. I’m happy to share the country with stupid people, as long as they don’t force their ideas on me. So rather than making unsupported claims that a significant proportion of Americans are religiously “militant,” wouldn’t it be better to give some evidence… perhaps a well-reasoned specific example where these supposed militants are forcing their beliefs on others?

      • http://www.agnostic-library.com/ma/ PsiCop

        Re: “No militant religionist has ever forced me to do anything. Not even once.”

        You’re lucky. They love making people do things. For instance, they’ve campaigned to coerce store personnel to say “Merry Christmas” to everyone … without regard to whether or not that store employee, or the person s/he’s talking to, celebrates Christmas.

        They’re guilty of a lot more coercion than you may even be aware of.

        Re: “I went to a public school system that taught values offensive to many religious people… yet those religious people were forced to pay for the public schools. I’ve never been forced to pay for their religous schools or institutions.”
        Yes, and Quakers … who are pacifists … are required to pay taxes, some of which goes to the Pentagon, and they object to that. They’ve attempted to litigate that, but the bottom line is, they have to pay their taxes anyway.

        I object to the 2008 bail-outs; I don’t think my tax money should have funded them. I object to corporate welfare and other kinds of commercial bribery (e.g. when a government uses tax-abatements to draw in businesses). But I still have to pay my taxes too.

        The cost of living in any society is that at least some of one’s tax money ends up going places one would personally rather not let it go to. But you know what? Too bad. The mature thing to do is accept it and move on.

        As for being forced to pay for religious institutions, particularly schools, taxpayers in Louisiana very well end up doing exactly that.

        Re: “… perhaps a well-reasoned specific example where these supposed militants are forcing their beliefs on others?

        I just gave you two. My guess is, you’ll argue them away. If you need more, though, I can always provide them. They’re not hard to come up with.

  • Erista

    This is why the Christian definition of “love” pisses me off so much. It’s all “I love you, but I won’t actually help you.” What kind of fucked up person won’t help someone they love? Would Pat Robertson say to his REAL loved ones “Yes, you are starving and without support, but I don’t want to be bothered with your problems?”

    Actually, I’m afraid of the answer.

    • Katiefickey

      Pat Robertson is an idiot and in NO WAY represents the majority of believers of Jesus. I am embarrassed that he claims to follow the same Jesus I do. I am an adoptive mom and am completely appalled at his ridiculous and ignorant statements. The bible is very clear about the fact that you help people first. Not vomit the gospel at them and then walk away. Ugh. He infuriates me and gives the rest of us a bad rap. Idiot.

      • amycas

         You don’t think Robertson represents the majority of Christians, even though he has millions of followers? I’m just going to copy-pasta from upthread: get all of your Christian friends together, get your churches together,
        band together and make a national organization to tell Pat Robertson
        he’s wrong. Make your voices heard, because right now you’re allowing
        the crazies to take the stage.

      • Erista

         I once had a Christian friend who insisted that Christianity was the best religion because it was the only one that said to love everyone. When I asked her what it meant for a Christian to “love everyone,” she said that it meant that the Christian must care enough to share the gospel with everyone.

        No joke; to her, Christian love was proselytizing.

  • Paul_Robertson

    The consensus in the comments seems to be that this woman has done a wonderfully generous thing and that Pat Robertson has denied her praise that is her due and the men in her dating pool are deadbeats for not recognising her worth. I’m sorry, but I see nothing praiseworthy about international adoption.

    As with domestic adoption, demand for children far outstrips supply. Unlike with domestic adoption, this shortfall is made up by purchasing or stealing children from their birth parents. Mother Jones has a heart-wrenching piece discussing this problem.

    UNICEF’s position is that:

    “[E]very child has the right to know and be cared for
    by his or her own parents, whenever possible.  [... F]amilies needing support to care for their children should receive
    it, and that alternative means of caring for a child should only be
    considered when, despite this assistance, a child’s family is
    unavailable, unable or unwilling to care for him or her. “

    My view is that offering financial support to a foreign child in need is a generous and selfless act. On the other hand, people adopting from overseas have chosen to support a corrupt industry that is tearing apart families in poor countries. And they’ve done it to fulfill their desire to raise a child. There’s no generosity in this act.

    • Katiefickey

      As an adoptive mom who has learned much about the business of adoption in the world….I agree with you that much of it becomes a supply/demand scenario, which is sad and extremely corrupt and immeasurably unhelpful. Ideally a child should get to stay in their country, be adopted by a local family, and grow up to be a beneficial citizen of that country. But, this not always (actually very rarely) is an option. Impoverished countries sometimes don’t have the resources to care for all the orphans that are left behind by way and genocide. It’s just a fact. We have an adopted son from the Congo who is HIV positive. The wonderful people of the Congo simply are not financially and physically equipped to deal with that. So, what’s the solution? Certainly not to let them die in an orphanage because their might be a child in the US foster care system that needs a home more? Who can say what child is more deserving of a home and a family and decent medical care? I assure you that I took no part in a supporting a corrupt industry, and it had nothing to do with my desire to raise a child (I already had 3). It has to do with the fact that this child would have died without it. Don’t generalize all international adoptive families….or you might put yourself in the same category as MR Robertson himself.

      • Paul_Robertson

        Don’t generalize all international adoptive families….
        The problem is not that the adoptive families are knowingly adopting stolen children, rather it is that they have no way of knowing. Even in the case of your adopted son, how can you know that his parents willingly gave him up even in the face of his disease? Yes, your son will receive better care and live a longer life in the USA than back in the Congo, but that would be true of any Congolese child, with or without HIV. In fact, it would also be true of a child taken from a poor American family. One must be very careful about going down this path.

        • Annalemma

          Not all children are taken from birth parents. Many children come up for adoption for the same reasons they come up here. The woman has more children that she wants to take care of, the mother is too young, the mother does not want to be a mother, the parents regard the pregnacy as a shame on the family, etc.

          • Paul_Robertson

            But still we come up against the problem that we have no way of knowing. When adopting overseas, at best we’re purchasing a rare commodity and denying some other wealthy, Western family the possibility of raising this child; at worst, we’re taking the child from its loving family. In neither case is this a praiseworthy act, at best it’s ethically neutral.

    • CultOfReason

      1. Yes, this lady did a wonderful thing by adopting.
      2. Praise her, or don’t. I doubt praise was her motivation for adopting.
      3. No, the men she meets are not “deadbeats”. They have legitimate concerns, as anyone should. Eventually, the right man will come around. And if he doesn’t, I’m sure this lady is quite capable of continuing on raising her children without one.
      4. All adoptions, foreign or domestic, are fraught with uncertainties, just like many of life’s important decisions are. But some believe the benefits outweigh those uncertainties. While 100% certainty is hardly ever attainable on any decision we make, proper research can get us to a reasonable level.

  • Ericinmaine

    Why is this dick still on TV? And why does that African-American woman stay on that show?

  • Randomstu

    Pat Robertson’s position on marijuana is much much much more sane and compassionate than that of Obama.

  • cipher

    The best advice this woman could be given is not to ask Pat Robertson for advice.

  • http://annainca.blogspot.com/ Anna

    I don’t think this type of attitude is limited to Pat Robertson. I’ve thought for a long time that American society has a strong anti-adoption bias, which is perhaps stronger when adoptions cross racial lines. While a lot of anti-gay rhetoric revolves around the idea that biological families are superior to non-biological ones, it’s not just conservatives who believe this. I think it’s part of the culture at large. To me, it’s very evident when you look at the treatment of adoption in the media. If you look at the language and attitudes and assumptions, you’ll see that adoptive families just aren’t considered as real or good as biological ones.

  • RobertoTheChi

    This man is the most vile human. He sounds like a senile fool.

  • Robyman4

    As I always say, the poor and starving need bread and blankets, not Bibles and bullsh-t.

  • Rwlawoffice

    As a Christian directly involved with the care of orphans the line in this post that ministering to them is the worst thing you can do and that those Christians who care for orphans do nothing for them but minister to them shows the ignorance of this writer. She apparently has little if any information on what Christians do around the world for orphans. Their “ministry” is far more than spreading the gospel. It includes taking care of them feeding them, educating them, loving them, providing for them medically, and adopting them. Caring Christians all over the globe have dedicated their lives to caring for orphans.

    I’m not defending pat robertsons statement in any way, but the author of this post knows nothing about Christian ministries towards orphans.


CLOSE | X

HIDE | X