What Pat Robertson gets wrong about adoption

When a woman named Susan wrote the 700 Club looking for answers, she surely wasn’t expecting the kind she received. The mother of three adopted daughters, each from different countries, wrote to say that the men she was dating invariably got cold feet when it came to the subject of her children. “Why,” she asked, “are these men acting this way?”

Pat Robertson’s answer left audiences with their jaws hanging low. “A man doesn’t want to take on the United Nations,” he said, excusing the men, “and this woman’s got all these various children, a blended family. I mean what is it?”

Hint: The gospel.

Robertson went on to provide a reason why the men were justified in backing out. He mentioned a friend who adopted a child with “brain damage. . . . grew up weird. You just never know what’s been done to a child before you get that child.”

Continue reading at joeljmiller.com

« Previous Article

Posting Policy

We have no tolerance for comments containing violence, racism, vulgarity, profanity, all caps, or discourteous behavior. Thank you for partnering with us to maintain a courteous and useful public environment where we can engage in reasonable discourse. Read more.

http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100004047180339 John Adams

Why in the world is a single woman adopting children. Children need a mother AND father!!! Adoption agencies that adopt to single parents, queer people, etc. should be put out of business.
- Steve03
  
  Where in the world does it say she was single when she adopted the children? The fact that she is dating only says that she has no husband now. Her husband might have died or divorced her. And if we're going to ban abortion, we're going to need a whole lot more adoptive homes for the millions of extra children whose birth mothers can't care for them or don't want them. Even if you assume that children are better off with a mother and a father than with two fathers or a single parent, they're better off in a stable and loving adoptive home of any kind than being shuttled from foster home to foster home or warehoused in an orphanage. Your great namesake would be ashamed of you.
- evermyrtle
  
  It doesn't make a lot of sense that a single woman would adopt several children but we have a lady in our community that has adopted a child.
timpclimber

Robertson is a misguided bigot. WWJHMD? Open my heart and try to heal them with His love.
P.S. My children are adopted and I love them with all my heart along with the grandkids and GGkids they have provided me. This is the family god gave me.
Evermyrtle

Over the years of watching and knowing Pat Roberts he doesn't always use good sense when commenting. He just blurts out the first thing that comes to mind, it seems, which in itself means a irrational answer
fliteking

Robertson's response is not out of line if you consider many men may want a wife that has an unencumbered financial / social future.

No different really than a woman who has 3 children of her own, MANY men would not be interested in the same.

If the woman in question feels adopting 3 daughters was the right thing to do – - – GREAT! She needs to be a realist and move forward for the good of her family, not question what she feels others are doing wrong to her.

Is this a "feel good facebook answer" we all can agree with? No, but it is reality, something we must address daily. No escaping it.
Chris from Sydney

"Hint: The gospel"
So if a 'blended family' is required by the Gospel, then it must stand to reason I am disobying God by not having a 'blended' family ?
Why would God send me to Hell for wanting my wife and children to be White ?
Could somebody show me where Jesus commands that EVERY White country must become a 'melting pot' of 'blended' humanity ?
Why aren't Christians in Asian countries told that their families and countries need to become a 'blended' humanity because it's "The gospel"
Why aren't Christians in Black countries told that their families and countries need to become a 'blended' humanity because it's "The gospel"
ONLY in White countries are we told this SILLY stuff
The attempt to destroy, in whole or in part, EVERY White country, through 3rd World innigration and 'assimilation' is GENOCIDE
The crime of Genocide is judged before man.
Trying to excuse and justify it, in Jesus name, is blasphemy, and will be judged by God
'Anti-racism' is a codeword for Anti-White
Saltporkdoc

Shame on you Mr Robertson!
My late first wife (an RN) and I ( a Navy Corpsman, trained as an OR Technician and Combat Corpsman) were having difficulty concieving. We decided to adopt. Further, we decided to adopt a "special needs" child. Our rationale was simple. 1) We were prepared educationally and emotionally and financially to deal with the problems we would face together. 2) There would be NO guarantees we would be spared a "special needs" child even would we concieve our own!
We went on and loved our daughter for the ten years we had her until the physical anomalies caught up to her and she passed away in my arms, still wrapped in the love she had experienced before from us. Sadly, I also lost my wife 17yrs later. I take comfort in the fact that my wife and daughter are reunited and await my joining them.
You see, there are men out there who are willing, and dare I say without sounding as though I'm bragging, able to take on another man's children no matter that there may be issues of culture, health or ethnicity involved. Sir, you have some re-reading to do! Let me suggest you start in Matthew and …"suffer not the little children"…
- fliteking
  
  Perhaps you missed the point, there is no shame in what Robertson said, instead he is simply pointing out there are many who are the polar opposite of yourself.
  That is reality.
  
  Does that make them somehow 'worse' than you? Who knows. I think it does make them shallow, but that is my opinion.
  
  I say thumbs up to Robertson for NOT giving a "feel good – - – - this is the expectation of everyone – - -keep working at it – - -everything is gonna be fine" answer. There is to much of that kind of nonsense in the world and it diminishes the accomplishments of those such as yourself.
  - Saltporkdoc
    
    Thank you for your perspective and kindly stated opinion.
    Certainly, I could be mistaken in Mr Robertson's motivation and implication, but somehow, I "see" a wagging finger and hear a "what are you thinking" tone to his reply.
    If that is the case, I would stand by my original statement offering shame to Mr Robertson as this is a serious question from a person in true pain and she is not worthy of condemnation for her concern. I offered my experience not for sympathy but, as you put forward, proof there are those out there who are not so shallow. That should have been more clearly presented in Mr. Robertson's reply.
    - fliteking
      
      Great response. I raised my two kids as a single parent, then at age 41 took on two step-kids, all now adults. Now we have the pleasure of 2 grandkids who spend 3 days a week with us.
whitechildren

I am surprised such a sane thing came out of the mouth of Pat Robertson. Maybe some have lost faith in the multi-cultural heaven that most have having to defend themselves from these days.

Will the anti-white globalists we happy with Pat's comments or will they cut him to shreds?
- Evermyrtle
  
  He has made several radical remarks in the last couple of years.
fliteking

~~Nice try~~ on the atheist thing, right outa the ol' playbook. Rather 'expected' wouldn't you say?

Man . . . you guys really have nothing this election cycle.
- Bighoss
  
  Nothing but trouble for the GOP. Check the current national and swing state polls as of today (9/18). Not looking good for Romney. Just yesterday, he alienated a lot of voters when the video of his confab with fellow zillionaires showed him denigrating 47 percent of the citizens of this country as freeloading parasites who want only to have the gummint take care of him. The man's a rattlebrained fool!
  - Jeff Dixon
    
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VZWaxjiQyFk
    Obama's bitter gun owners comment. Amazing that anointed one said something so denigrating about the millions of gun owners in this country.
    - Bighoss
      
      He was not referring to all the gun owners in the country. He was speaking in western Pennsylvania in an area that was in deep recession, and he was referring to the sector of those people who believed that there was no relief in sight for them and who thus lashed out in several ways in an effort to salve their frustration. One can not make a case that his remarks, in context, subsumed all classes of American gun owners.
      - Jeff Dixon
        
        What Romney meant, of course, is that there is a population of America that’s gonna vote for Obama no matter the evidence presented them. Further, and more specifically, there is a population of America who have a tax situation that renders them immune to the concept of lower taxes – They’re already not paying any. For this population, “tax the rich” resonates.
        Romney is simply saying that he’ll never win this sector and therefore, won’t campaign to them. This is no more controversial than Romney admitting that he doesn’t need to campaign in California, New York or Texas. He’s already lost the first two and won the last. Does that mean when he wins he won’t govern with those state in mind? Clearly not, to think such a thing is ridiculous.
      - Bighoss
        
        Romney doesn't get off that easily. He characterized the "47 percent" of voters as "dependent on government" and asserted that they regard themselves as "victims." That kind of denigration is a lot more harsh than the lame "election strategy" rationale offered by Romney (and apparently inhaled by YOU) in his pitiful attempt to defend his statement.
        
        http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/09/18/mitt-romney-fox-interview_n_1894533.html
      - Jeff Dixon
        
        In a week, this will be another non-issue. The debates are what everyone is wanting to see.
      - Bighoss
        
        And the very wooden Mr. Romney will not, I predict, fare very well in the debates. In the VP debate, look for Joe Biden to put the lie to the wing nut critics who have greatly "misunderestimated" him.
      - Jeff Dixon
        
        We shall see. I suspect you will be very wrong.
      - Esther
        
        Coulter: Romney Was Right That Obama Supporters Are Dependent on Government 18 Sep 2012 05:26 PM By Jim Meyers and John Bachman, quote article: " Ann Coulter tells Newsmax that Mitt Romney was “absolutely right” when he said supporters of President Barack Obama are dependent on the government. She also states that the nation is approaching a “dangerous tipping point” when “takers” outnumber “makers” — and it’s “lights out for America” if Obama is re-elected. In an exclusive interview with Newsmax.TV on Tuesday, Coulter discusses Romney’s secretly recorded comments that the 47 percent of Americans who supported Obama were “people who pay no income tax” and thought of themselves as “victims” who are “entitled” to government benefits. “I don’t understand what’s even disputable about it. I mean, that’s how the Democrats get people to vote for the Democrats,” she says. “Give them a government job, give them some house, some sort of government largess. This is what it seems to me we’ve all been talking about, what’s happening to America and the dangerous tipping point we’re getting to where, when you have 51 percent of the population that’s taking more than it’s paying for government, they’re going to keep voting for the party of bigger and bigger government." end quote
        
        And here is the proof that Obama himself admits it:
        http://www.newsmax.com/Newsfront/obama-redistribution-loyola-speech/2012/09/18/id/456677?s=al&promo_code=101B8-1
      - Vladimir
        
        I would hate to be Mr Biden's handlers during the debate. Paul Ryan will eat him alive.
        
        Romney has the answers to Obama's disastrous policies of nationalizing everything. Free market capitalism succeeds and socialism fails EVERY TIME IT'S TRIED. Dispute THAT!
      - Jeff Dixon
        
        http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Journalism/2012/09/19/Mother-Jones-Admits-Romney-Tape-Missing-One-or-Two-Minutes
        Mother Jones, the left-wing magazine that released a controversial video of Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney's remarks to a fundraiser in May, now admits that it has no full tape of what Romney said, and that its video is missing "one to two minutes" at the most important moment.