Maggie Makes Four!

This journal started off documenting the adoption of our youngest daughter. It now follows the twist and turns of our lives as we raise these two amazing little creatures into the best women they can become.

Friday, August 05, 2005

Shame on the New York Times

Have you heard the reports that the New York Times was looking into the adoption records of Supreme Court Justice Nominees John Roberts' children? Now before you say, "Oh that isn't true, only Drudge is reporting it." The New York Times issued a statement saying that the investigation into the adoption was part of a 'normal' background check. Normal background check? Exactly what did they think will be found? And more importantly, why is the history of those children relevant? Has the media lost all sense of decency?

I am offended that the New York Times would consider opening private adoption records as part of the normal background check of a public figure. It makes me sick. It makes me believe the New York Times is looking to lynch someone and sadly if they can't lynch a grown up, the Times is willing to turn children into victims. The history of those children belongs to the birth parents, the children and the adoptive parents. Period. End of story. No explanation needed. To me, this is the equivalent of asking biological parents to recount the night their children were conceived for all the world to hear.

Now, let's be real about the reasons behind this. People are so paranoid about how Roberts is going to rule on abortion, they are suspicious the adoptions are an indication of his leanings. Please! For the record, adopting two children did nothing to impact my personal feelings about abortion. Absolutely nothing. The issues are unrelated. One is about rights, the other is about family. Separate issues. Does this mean it is the same for John Roberts? I have no idea, but I am at least open to the possibility that he can separate legal issues from his family's personal decisions.

All adoption says about a person is that they understand parenting isn't about biology; biology does not equate to quality of love; love is not exclusionary rather it is inclusionary...and adoptive families learn these lessons the minute a baby is placed in their arms. That moment defies logic and reason. It is a moment shared by all adoptive parents, and you don't get to have the moment unless you adopt. Anyone who thinks the paperwork and process that goes into making magic happen is relevant, is a person who has never experienced unconditional, irrational love themselves. How tragic. And how tragic for all of us, that this foolish, lonely person is willing to sacrifice two children for "our right to know". The world has no right to know on this one.

2 Comments:

  • At 8:38 AM , Anonymous Anonymous said...

    Superbly well put. I agree with you 100% and said so on China 33. Thank you for your insight.

    Alan Berris G88

     
  • At 1:32 PM , Blogger One Lucky Mom said...

    Saw your comments on China33. Needless to say, I agree. When I told some friends about the issue this AM, they, too, were righteously indignant. It is a sign that the media and the opposition has gone way too far.

     

Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

<< Home