Adoption as an alternative to breeding

[Novorobo]

Then you might have favouritism toward your own biological sons or daughters instead of your adopted ones. It should be adoption OR breeding, but not both.

What? I know plenty of families that do both depending on their circumstances there is nothing wrong with it.

The mark of successful raising of kids is not that you don't care for one more than the other (even with purely biological children there are always the ones who's personality mesh with the parents better) but that you raise them in a loving home, take care of their needs, make sure they grow into successful contributing adults.

If you are capable of doing that with adopted and biological children without putting undue burden on society then there is no reason not to do both

I'm not sure that's a meaningful comparison; we're wired to prefer our own flesh and blood over others' children. If all your kids are your own flesh and blood, the point is moot. If none of them are, the point is moot. If some of them are and some of them aren't... it stands to reason that can create problems beyond the usual parental favouritism.

Not that it should be illegal or anything, just that adoptive couples with biological children should be held to a little extra scrutiny.

[Esternial]

My fiancée isn't related to me by blood (because, ew). I love her madly. You can love someone not related to you by blood.

Funny, or rather creepy, how you find more disgusting the idea of incest with a woman than the implied pedophilia of this comparison. :p
Anyway, your comparison make the perfect exemple. Sure you can love them madly. But you won't love them as your kids. They won't be the blood of your blood, the flesh of your flesh. They won't be your.

A fitting illustration of the "possessive" mindset a lot of people have when it comes to people, often also pertaining to one's partner.

I don't really see, even if you're right, why you need to maximize your love in this instance. The love you can have for an adopted child is more than sufficient, and some of the hate some parents show to their own flesh and blood is disgusting, anyway.

The whole notion of "preferring your own blood" has little rationale beyond one's primitive programming, which we're more than capable of surpassing these days. I hope.

[Aelex]

A fitting illustration of the "possessive" mindset a lot of people have when it comes to people, often also pertaining to one's partner.

What's the problem with that? A good relationship is one where two people agree to live "as one" , mutually "possessing" but also "belonging" to each other. One ought to ask more of a partner than merely sharing his bedroom and house.
The same go in an even stronger sense with kids as your blood is literally flowing in their own.

[Italios]

Why shouldn't we just have children the normal way?

Some people don't have that ability or simply do not choose to have them for reasons that are personal. It's really that simple.

[Aelex]

I don't really see, even if you're right, why you need to maximize your love in this instance. The love you can have for an adopted child is more than sufficient, and some of the hate some parents show to their own flesh and blood is disgusting, anyway.

The whole notion of "preferring your own blood" has little rationale beyond one's primitive programming, which we're more than capable of surpassing these days. I hope.

You don't need to. I'm just saying it simply won't be the same.

And well, it's all fine and dandy to try to go against human nature but " chassez le naturel et il revient au gallop". Once more, I'm not saying that it's more rationale. Just that it's bound to happen in most case despite your dislike of it.

[Aelex]

Why shouldn't we just have children the normal way?

Some people don't have that ability or simply do not choose to have them for reasons that are personal. It's really that simple.

So because of them, no one should have the right to have children without paying a fine?

[Spiffier]

so instead of breeding ourselves we should steal the children of 3rd world countries?

creepy

It would be great trolling of people who rant about the Brown Muslim Zombie horde overrunning the Civilized West though.

Even more hilarioous if someone who rants against the Brown Muslim Zombie horde adopts a Middle Eastern child.

I don't know if the decision to be a parent should factor "trolling" as part of decision.

[Esternial]

A fitting illustration of the "possessive" mindset a lot of people have when it comes to people, often also pertaining to one's partner.

What's the problem with that? A good relationship is one where two people agree to live "as one" , mutually "possessing" but also "belonging" to each other. One ought to ask more of a partner than merely sharing his bedroom and house.
The same go in an even stronger sense with kids as your blood is literally flowing in their own.

Plenty, as it's an unhealthy mindset to have, one that carries the risk of going hand-in-hand with abuse. Kind of disconcerting you see nothing wrong with it. You can live as one without feeling an underlying sentiment of possessiveness towards your partner. You're portraying this as an either/or scenario while it's far from it. Possessiveness can restrict both partners in their freedom.

Kind of the wrong use of literally, but you probably thought it was a good choice to add it for hyperbole.

[Xadufell]

Adoption an alternative to breeding... Wow. That is really something, you know?

Like... How are we going to adopt kids if no one is having kids?

[Italios]

Some people don't have that ability or simply do not choose to have them for reasons that are personal. It's really that simple.

So because of them, no one should have the right to have children without paying a fine?

That's not what I'm saying, and I have no idea how you got that from my post. I was simply replying to Dinake's question which frankly was a little, well, ignorant.

[New haven america]

I don't think that'll fix the birth rate issue.

[Italios]

Adoption an alternative to breeding... Wow. That is really something, you know?

Like... How are we going to adopt kids if no one is having kids?

I believe the OP was suggesting banning or limiting births in the first world and just adopting from third world countries. Or creating a new generation made up entirely of test tube babies. Either works.

[Esternial]

I don't really see, even if you're right, why you need to maximize your love in this instance. The love you can have for an adopted child is more than sufficient, and some of the hate some parents show to their own flesh and blood is disgusting, anyway.

The whole notion of "preferring your own blood" has little rationale beyond one's primitive programming, which we're more than capable of surpassing these days. I hope.

You don't need to. I'm just saying it simply won't be the same.

And well, it's all fine and dandy to try to go against human nature but " chassez le naturel et il revient au gallop". Once more, I'm not saying that it's more rationale. Just that it's bound to happen in most case despite your dislike of it.

I don't dislike it. I'm just saying there's no rational argument in favour for it.

Either through efforts of my own or through adoption, I'd still love the child to bits. Genetically it may not be mine, but there's a lot of influence you can have during its upbringing, even on an epigenetic level.

Maybe I can understand there being a lesser bond if you adopt, for instance, a 10-year old.

[Nanzuanshi]

I don't think replacing the native population with another ethnicity is going to catch on...

[Aelex]

Plenty, as it's an unhealthy mindset to have, one that carries the risk of going hand-in-hand with abuse. Kind of disconcerting you see nothing wrong with it. You can live as one without feeling an underlying sentiment of possessiveness towards your partner. You're portraying this as an either/or scenario while it's far from it. Possessiveness can restrict both partners in their freedom.

Kind of the wrong use of literally, but you probably thought it was a good choice to add it for hyperbole.

Not really no. Less likely to provoke abuse, in fact, than considering your partner as just someone you "happen to live with" rather than as something more than that; now, one don't need to go "full yandere" for that, just consider is loved one as worth as much as himself.
Anyway, I think the disagreement we have come from the fact that you're trying to impose your liberal ethics on everyone else but I'll stop you right here and tell you that I prefer morality to them. One may only have true freedom only when alone. One need to relinquish part of it to build a real relation. An union libre is nothing but a parody of a relationship.

And please m8. Literally no one use "literally" literally.

[United Marxist Nations]

Funny, or rather creepy, how you find more disgusting the idea of incest with a woman than the implied pedophilia of this comparison.
Anyway, your comparison make the perfect exemple. Sure you can love them madly. But you won't love them as your kids. They won't be the blood of your blood, the flesh of your flesh. They won't be your.

A fitting illustration of the "possessive" mindset a lot of people have when it comes to people, often also pertaining to one's partner.

I don't really see, even if you're right, why you need to maximize your love in this instance. The love you can have for an adopted child is more than sufficient, and some of the hate some parents show to their own flesh and blood is disgusting, anyway.

The whole notion of "preferring your own blood" has little rationale beyond one's primitive programming, which we're more than capable of surpassing these days. I hope.

Hey, it's scientific, fam.

[Aelex]

So because of them, no one should have the right to have children without paying a fine?

That's not what I'm saying, and I have no idea how you got that from my post. I was simply replying to Dinake's question which frankly was a little, well, ignorant.

Have you read the O.P? Because it's what he is asking for to be implemented.

[Esternial]

Plenty, as it's an unhealthy mindset to have, one that carries the risk of going hand-in-hand with abuse. Kind of disconcerting you see nothing wrong with it. You can live as one without feeling an underlying sentiment of possessiveness towards your partner. You're portraying this as an either/or scenario while it's far from it. Possessiveness can restrict both partners in their freedom.

Kind of the wrong use of literally, but you probably thought it was a good choice to add it for hyperbole.

Not really no. Less likely to provoke abuse, in fact, than considering your partner as just someone you "happen to live with" rather than as something more than that; now, one don't need to go "full yandere" for that, just consider is loved one as worth as much as himself.

Anyway, I think the disagreement we have come from the fact that you're trying to impose your liberal ethics on everyone else but I'll stop you right here and tell you that I prefer morality to them. One may only have true freedom only when alone. One need to relinquish part of it to build a real relation. An union libre is nothing but a parody of a relationship.

And please m8. Literally no one use "literally" literally. :p

I never said you should consider your partner as just someone you happen to live with. Again, it's not an either/or. Possession is just one aspect of a relationships. Love and mutual respect is another. They are not on each other's presence in a relationship.

I'm also not imposing anything. I'm just saying what I think and what is possible, so please refrain from making any such assumptions in the future. Also, for fuck's sake, don't use the term "liberal ethics". These are my own views and calling them that cheapens my own worldview to something I copy-paste from some shitty Tumblr blog, something I've not been doing to your input on this matter.

Certainly, you give up some of your freedom, but when you're possessive you may end up taking away more freedom from your partner than you actually intend.

All I'm saying is that you can have a functional and healthy relationships without there being mutual feelings of possession. Nothing more. It's not the only way to go. I just personally find it unhealthy, and maybe that's just because of my own personal experiences.

[Aelex]

I never said you should consider your partner as just someone you happen to live with. Again, it's not an either/or. Possession is just one aspect of a relationships. Love and mutual respect is another. They are not on each other's presence in a relationship.

I'm also not imposing anything. I'm just saying what I think and what is possible, so please refrain from making any such assumptions in the future. Also, for fuck's sake, don't use the term "liberal ethics". These are my own views and calling them that cheapens my own worldview to something I copy-paste from some shitty Tumblr blog, something I've not been doing to your input on this matter.

Certainly, you give up some of your freedom, but when you're possessive you may end up taking away more freedom from your partner than you actually intend.

All I'm saying is that you can have a functional and healthy relationships without there being mutual feelings of possession. Nothing more. It's not the only way to go. I just personally find it unhealthy, and maybe that's just because of my own personal experiences.

Fair enough, I guess.

[Jochizyd Republic]

It's a nice thing to do, adopt a child. But I can understand the whole "not being my actual kid" issue.

[Vvarden]

In my book, adoption is fine for couples that can't have children, but everyone stopping having kids and adopting from third world countries, it's going to be a problem. What if the adopted children have parents but were cut off? What if they wish to return home? What if they hate being adopted?
I don't mind it for people who can't have kids and same sex couples along those with goodwill in their hearts, but for nearly everyone, it's a little extreme.

[HMS Vanguard]

The self-euthanising populations of the West will be gone soon, so it's a temporary problem.

[Xadufell]

Hold on, are you saying that instead of the people of the nations just having more sex, we should propagate other races and leave the original to die out? Alright, thanks for the subtle genocide.

[Vvarden]

The self-euthanising populations of the West will be gone soon, so it's a temporary problem.

What do you mean? How is the current population self-euthanising?

[Katganistan]

so instead of breeding ourselves we should steal the children of 3rd world countries?

creepy

Well, start with adopting the orphans, and if it catches on, we'll see how it goes from there.

If third world people see how much better off they are in the first world, they might hand them over willingly.

Suuuuuure, just like I'd hand over my flesh and blood to a stranger thousands of miles away and a different culture and rel-- fuck no, I wouldn't.

Really, an idiotic idea, and one that's been done before with horrendously traumatic results.

What's that saying about those who don't learn from history?