Bill Pierce? [Archive] - Labor Law Talk

Dian

01-14-2004, 08:27 AM

"Ron Morgan" <rhyzome1@earthlink.net> wrote in message news:<LD5Nb.8367$1e.4912@newsread2.news.pas.earthlink.ne t>... Bill Pierce was my adversary, not only did he lead the movement against opening records, he embodied the attitudes and political inertia that keeps the United States the sole industrialized nation that seals its adoption records to adult adoptees. But he was a worthy adversary. Bill Pierce helped shape the open records movement by the quality and attitude of his opposition to it. He was a consummate professional politician, in all the connotations of the word, and thus he compelled us to become better activists, organizers, and politicians. Bill did not suffer fools, at least those who disagreed with him, and so he made us keep our wits sharpened, especially when we went one on one with him. He was the best the sealed records crowd had to offer; no one has attained his stature since his retirement. I had the opportunity to get to know Bill personally, not closely, but enough to get a hint of the man. We shared an appreciation for a good joke, a good argument, a good fight. He used to post to alt.adoption, in various guises, never as himself, until a few of us caught on and started ragging on him mercilessly. Then, one day shortly thereafter, he appeared as Pierceforhimself, and although he never admitted his Walter Mitty-esque turns pretending to be a congressional aide or an African-American physician, he never complained about the abuse we heaped on him either. Once, at a taping of a TV show on which we both appeared, we spoke about life after the fray, in a future when records were opened to adult adoptees, and he seemed filled with equinimity. After the show was over, as the theme music came up in the house, Bill started boogying enthusiastically in his chair. I'll hold the smile that evoked as his memory. Ron Morgan Proud Bastard Community Organizer San Francisco, CA 1/13/04

Aside from his charming debating skills, his lifelong crusade denied
millions of adopted people their human rights and many died well ahead
of him, never knowing their true identity. And many mothers died never
knowing what became of their children. Because of him.

Who will write their epitaphs?

Di

AdoptaDad

01-14-2004, 08:38 AM

>Subject: Re: Bill PierceFrom: patrice68@bigpond.com.au (Dian)Date: 1/14/2004 11:27 AM Eastern Standard TimeMessage-id: <c599139c.0401140827.4e631b78@posting.google.com>"Ron Morgan" <rhyzome1@earthlink.net> wrote in messagenews:<LD5Nb.8367$1e.4912@newsread2.news.pas.earthlink.ne t>... Bill Pierce was my adversary, not only did he lead the movement against opening records, he embodied the attitudes and political inertia that keeps the United States the sole industrialized nation that seals its adoption records to adult adoptees. But he was a worthy adversary. Bill Pierce helped shape the open records movement by the quality and attitude of his opposition to it. He was a consummate professional politician, in all the connotations of the word, and thus he compelled usto become better activists, organizers, and politicians. Bill did not suffer fools, at least those who disagreed with him, and so he made us keep our wits sharpened, especially when we went one on one with him. He was thebest the sealed records crowd had to offer; no one has attained his staturesince his retirement. I had the opportunity to get to know Bill personally, not closely, but enough to get a hint of the man. We shared an appreciation for a good joke, a good argument, a good fight. He used to post to alt.adoption, in various guises, never as himself, until a few of us caught on and started raggingon him mercilessly. Then, one day shortly thereafter, he appeared as Pierceforhimself, and although he never admitted his Walter Mitty-esque turns pretending to be a congressional aide or an African-American physician, he never complained about the abuse we heaped on him either. Once, at a taping of a TV show on which we both appeared, we spoke about life after the fray, in a future when records were opened to adultadoptees, and he seemed filled with equinimity. After the show was over, as the theme music came up in the house, Bill started boogying enthusiastically in his chair. I'll hold the smile that evoked as his memory. Ron Morgan Proud Bastard Community Organizer San Francisco, CA 1/13/04Aside from his charming debating skills, his lifelong crusade deniedmillions of adopted people their human rights and many died well aheadof him, never knowing their true identity. And many mothers died neverknowing what became of their children. Because of him.Who will write their epitaphs?

I think you should get in touch with the Pierce family and offer to give the
eulogy.

Dad

Ron Morgan

01-14-2004, 09:53 AM

"Dian" <patrice68@bigpond.com.au> wrote in message
news:c599139c.0401140827.4e631b78@posting.google.c om... "Ron Morgan" <rhyzome1@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:<LD5Nb.8367$1e.4912@newsread2.news.pas.earthlink.ne t>... Bill Pierce was my adversary, not only did he lead the movement against opening records, he embodied the attitudes and political inertia that
keeps the United States the sole industrialized nation that seals its adoption records to adult adoptees. But he was a worthy adversary.


Aside from his charming debating skills, his lifelong crusade denied millions of adopted people their human rights and many died well ahead of him, never knowing their true identity. And many mothers died never knowing what became of their children. Because of him. Who will write their epitaphs? Di

The living.

Ron

Kathy T

01-14-2004, 01:32 PM

>Subject: Re: Bill Pierce? ConfirmedFrom: jmdjmh@aol.compostible (J.)Date: 1/13/04 6:50 PM Pacific Standard TimeMessage-id: <20040113215020.06226.00002382@mb-m19.aol.com>In article <309900pnp8mt7k3q1hhh4h0udd6iubqmmh@4ax.com>, nancy<me@privacy.net>writes:On Tue, 13 Jan 2004 20:02:28 -0600, "CG" <kspeach@yahoo.com>wrote:Never mind......found it;http://www.adoptioncouncil.org/This part could be interesting......****The National Council For Adoption invites tributes to its foundingpresident, William L. Pierce, for inclusion on its website,www.adoptioncouncil.org . Please email submissions tolallen@infantadopt.org, including your name, affiliation, and title, or association with BillPierce. ******No tears were shed in the making of this post.For some reason, I feel sorta bad about this. I didn'tagree with (almost) anything he said, but I enjoyed hispresence on a.a.NancyThere are very few deaths that one can or should rejoice in. Bill Pierce'sdeath is not one of them for me, if for no other reason than he was a friendofa friend who mourns his death. Whether one agreed with him or not onadoptionissues, he also was one of us for a time.J.Reply to jmhjmd at aol.

Very well said J. I agree completely. I may not have agreed with many of his
words, but he spoke them with respect and dignity. May he rest in peace.
Kathy, born Renee Karyn Racine

Permanent good can never be the outcome of untruth and violence.
--Mahatma Gandhi
Peace is not merely a distant goal that we seek, but a means by which we arrive
at that goal.
--Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.

Kathy T

01-14-2004, 01:35 PM

>Subject: Re: Bill PierceFrom: patrice68@bigpond.com.au (Dian)Date: 1/14/04 8:27 AM Pacific Standard TimeMessage-id: <c599139c.0401140827.4e631b78@posting.google.com>"Ron Morgan" <rhyzome1@earthlink.net> wrote in messagenews:<LD5Nb.8367$1e.4912@newsread2.news.pas.earthlink.ne t>... Bill Pierce was my adversary, not only did he lead the movement against opening records, he embodied the attitudes and political inertia that keeps the United States the sole industrialized nation that seals its adoption records to adult adoptees. But he was a worthy adversary. Bill Pierce helped shape the open records movement by the quality and attitude of his opposition to it. He was a consummate professional politician, in all the connotations of the word, and thus he compelled usto become better activists, organizers, and politicians. Bill did not suffer fools, at least those who disagreed with him, and so he made us keep our wits sharpened, especially when we went one on one with him. He was thebest the sealed records crowd had to offer; no one has attained his staturesince his retirement. I had the opportunity to get to know Bill personally, not closely, but enough to get a hint of the man. We shared an appreciation for a good joke, a good argument, a good fight. He used to post to alt.adoption, in various guises, never as himself, until a few of us caught on and started raggingon him mercilessly. Then, one day shortly thereafter, he appeared as Pierceforhimself, and although he never admitted his Walter Mitty-esque turns pretending to be a congressional aide or an African-American physician, he never complained about the abuse we heaped on him either. Once, at a taping of a TV show on which we both appeared, we spoke about life after the fray, in a future when records were opened to adultadoptees, and he seemed filled with equinimity. After the show was over, as the theme music came up in the house, Bill started boogying enthusiastically in his chair. I'll hold the smile that evoked as his memory. Ron Morgan Proud Bastard Community Organizer San Francisco, CA 1/13/04Aside from his charming debating skills, his lifelong crusade deniedmillions of adopted people their human rights and many died well aheadof him, never knowing their true identity. And many mothers died neverknowing what became of their children. Because of him.Who will write their epitaphs?Di

Bill Pierce was against opening the records that someone else closed before
him. Let's try to keep our eye on the ball here.
Kathy, born Renee Karyn Racine

Permanent good can never be the outcome of untruth and violence.
--Mahatma Gandhi
Peace is not merely a distant goal that we seek, but a means by which we arrive
at that goal.
--Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.

Kathy T

01-14-2004, 01:42 PM

>Subject: Re: Bill Pierce? ConfirmedFrom: patrice68@bigpond.com.au (Dian)Date: 1/14/04 2:47 AM Pacific Standard TimeMessage-id: <c599139c.0401140247.2eeef27a@posting.google.com>"CG" <kspeach@yahoo.com> wrote in messagenews:<4004a338$1_7@corp.newsgroups.com>... Never mind......found it; http://www.adoptioncouncil.org/ This part could be interesting...... ****The National Council For Adoption invites tributes to its founding president, William L. Pierce, for inclusion on its website, www.adoptioncouncil.org . Please email submissions tolallen@infantadopt.org , including your name, affiliation, and title, or association with Bill Pierce. ****** No tears were shed in the making of this post. Christina<<<<Pierce worked tirelessly to present infant adoption as a lovingoption and played a major role in conceiving the Infant AdoptionAwareness Act. This policy, part of the Children's Health Act of 2000,created the Infant Adoption Awareness Training Program, which trainshealth and pregnancy counselors in presenting adoption as a positiveoption for unplanned pregnancy>>>Pierce brought insurmountable misery to countless US mothers in hisquest to encourage more infant adoption in the early 80's when it wasall but over in most other parts of the western world. His legacy willlive on eternally for them.Di

Was it a gun, or a knife that he held to these mother's heads to force them to
relinquish?

While I might not agree with his position on most adoption issues, I do believe
he encouraged adoption because he felt it was the best thing for the children.
Whether or not that was actually the case, it's hard not to respect someone who
has such high regard for children. The man was a gentleman.

While the open records community might just breath a collective sigh of relief
that their most outspoken adversary will now be silent, I doubt that most are
celebrating his death. I find it incredibly tacky and insensitive to only
point out negative things. I hope when your time comes, people don't sit
around thinking of all of the things they feel you did wrong, or that they
disagreed with you about. I hope you're shown more respect than that. Most
people (Mr. Pierce most definitely included) deserve it.

"CG" wrote in message news:4004a1c0$1_7@corp.newsgroups.com... Can anyone confirm or deny the rumor of his passing? I just received an email on this today. -- Christina

Kathy, born Renee Karyn Racine

Permanent good can never be the outcome of untruth and violence.
--Mahatma Gandhi
Peace is not merely a distant goal that we seek, but a means by which we arrive
at that goal.
--Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.

Chosenchildinc1

01-14-2004, 01:54 PM

>Subject: Re: Bill Pierce? ConfirmedFrom: reneekarynracine@aol.comhomesafe (Kathy T)Date: 1/14/2004 6:12 PM Newfoundland Standard TimeMessage-id: <20040114164206.29591.00002566@mb-m02.aol.com>Subject: Re: Bill Pierce? ConfirmedFrom: patrice68@bigpond.com.au (Dian)Date: 1/14/04 2:47 AM Pacific Standard TimeMessage-id: <c599139c.0401140247.2eeef27a@posting.google.com>"CG" <kspeach@yahoo.com> wrote in messagenews:<4004a338$1_7@corp.newsgroups.com>... Never mind......found it; http://www.adoptioncouncil.org/ This part could be interesting...... ****The National Council For Adoption invites tributes to its founding president, William L. Pierce, for inclusion on its website, www.adoptioncouncil.org . Please email submissions tolallen@infantadopt.org , including your name, affiliation, and title, or association with Bill Pierce. ****** No tears were shed in the making of this post. Christina<<<<Pierce worked tirelessly to present infant adoption as a lovingoption and played a major role in conceiving the Infant AdoptionAwareness Act. This policy, part of the Children's Health Act of 2000,created the Infant Adoption Awareness Training Program, which trainshealth and pregnancy counselors in presenting adoption as a positiveoption for unplanned pregnancy>>>Pierce brought insurmountable misery to countless US mothers in hisquest to encourage more infant adoption in the early 80's when it wasall but over in most other parts of the western world. His legacy willlive on eternally for them.DiWas it a gun, or a knife that he held to these mother's heads to force themtorelinquish?While I might not agree with his position on most adoption issues, I dobelievehe encouraged adoption because he felt it was the best thing for thechildren.Whether or not that was actually the case, it's hard not to respect someonewhohas such high regard for children. The man was a gentleman. While the open records community might just breath a collective sigh ofreliefthat their most outspoken adversary will now be silent, I doubt that most arecelebrating his death. I find it incredibly tacky and insensitive to onlypoint out negative things. I hope when your time comes, people don't sitaround thinking of all of the things they feel you did wrong, or that theydisagreed with you about. I hope you're shown more respect than that. Mostpeople (Mr. Pierce most definitely included) deserve it. "CG" wrote in message news:4004a1c0$1_7@corp.newsgroups.com... > Can anyone confirm or deny the rumor of his passing? I just received an > email on this today. > -- > ChristinaKathy, born Renee Karyn RacinePermanent good can never be the outcome of untruth and violence.--Mahatma GandhiPeace is not merely a distant goal that we seek, but a means by which wearriveat that goal.--Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.

I agree, he was always a gentleman on this group and I believe he respected
others opinions, even though he didn't always agree with them. There are many
who still believe in closed records, I see it all the time, even though I
disagree, that is their opinion and they are entitled to it. It doesn't make
them a bad person, or even mean they are wrong.

The chocolate and vanilla theory, you can't make one like the other. In his
defense, I never saw him hostile, nasty, condemning or demeaning. He seemed
like a tolerant man. He deserves respect, even if you disagreed with him.

helicon

01-14-2004, 05:51 PM

I would just like to add to the nice comments made about Bill Pierce. I
always thought of him as a nice guy, courteous and with a good sense of
humour. Even when he disagreed with someone (or they with him) he was
unfailingly polite in his responses. He loved Marley, and that's enough for
me. <g>

As they say in Dublin about people like him: he was a decent skin - a
gentleman and a scholar.

Helen

Dian

01-14-2004, 08:58 PM

reneekarynracine@aol.comhomesafe (Kathy T) wrote in message news:<20040114164206.29591.00002566@mb-m02.aol.com>...Subject: Re: Bill Pierce? ConfirmedFrom: patrice68@bigpond.com.au (Dian)Date: 1/14/04 2:47 AM Pacific Standard TimeMessage-id: <c599139c.0401140247.2eeef27a@posting.google.com>"CG" <kspeach@yahoo.com> wrote in messagenews:<4004a338$1_7@corp.newsgroups.com>... Never mind......found it; http://www.adoptioncouncil.org/ This part could be interesting...... ****The National Council For Adoption invites tributes to its founding president, William L. Pierce, for inclusion on its website, www.adoptioncouncil.org . Please email submissions to lallen@infantadopt.org , including your name, affiliation, and title, or association with Bill Pierce. ****** No tears were shed in the making of this post. Christina<<<<Pierce worked tirelessly to present infant adoption as a lovingoption and played a major role in conceiving the Infant AdoptionAwareness Act. This policy, part of the Children's Health Act of 2000,created the Infant Adoption Awareness Training Program, which trainshealth and pregnancy counselors in presenting adoption as a positiveoption for unplanned pregnancy>>>Pierce brought insurmountable misery to countless US mothers in hisquest to encourage more infant adoption in the early 80's when it wasall but over in most other parts of the western world. His legacy willlive on eternally for them.Di Was it a gun, or a knife that he held to these mother's heads to force them to relinquish? While I might not agree with his position on most adoption issues, I do believe he encouraged adoption because he felt it was the best thing for the children. Whether or not that was actually the case, it's hard not to respect someone who has such high regard for children. The man was a gentleman. While the open records community might just breath a collective sigh of relief that their most outspoken adversary will now be silent, I doubt that most are celebrating his death. I find it incredibly tacky and insensitive to only point out negative things. I hope when your time comes, people don't sit around thinking of all of the things they feel you did wrong, or that they disagreed with you about. I hope you're shown more respect than that. Most people (Mr. Pierce most definitely included) deserve it.

Are you a member of Bastard Nation? If so, tell that to the countless
adoptees who died never knowing where they came from or their true
identities during his reign as King of closed records. I'm afraid my
sympathy lies with them.
He was directly responsible for their misery.

Di

"CG" wrote in message news:4004a1c0$1_7@corp.newsgroups.com... > Can anyone confirm or deny the rumor of his passing? I just received an > email on this today. > -- > Christina Kathy, born Renee Karyn Racine Permanent good can never be the outcome of untruth and violence. --Mahatma Gandhi Peace is not merely a distant goal that we seek, but a means by which we arrive at that goal. --Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.

Dian

01-14-2004, 09:04 PM

chosenchildinc1@aol.com (Chosenchildinc1) wrote in message news:<20040114165401.26415.00000016@mb-m05.aol.com>...Subject: Re: Bill Pierce? ConfirmedFrom: reneekarynracine@aol.comhomesafe (Kathy T)Date: 1/14/2004 6:12 PM Newfoundland Standard TimeMessage-id: <20040114164206.29591.00002566@mb-m02.aol.com>Subject: Re: Bill Pierce? ConfirmedFrom: patrice68@bigpond.com.au (Dian)Date: 1/14/04 2:47 AM Pacific Standard TimeMessage-id: <c599139c.0401140247.2eeef27a@posting.google.com>"CG" <kspeach@yahoo.com> wrote in messagenews:<4004a338$1_7@corp.newsgroups.com>...> Never mind......found it;> http://www.adoptioncouncil.org/>> This part could be interesting......> ****The National Council For Adoption invites tributes to its founding> president, William L. Pierce, for inclusion on its website,> www.adoptioncouncil.org . Please email submissions to lallen@infantadopt.org> , including your name, affiliation, and title, or association with Bill> Pierce. ******>>> No tears were shed in the making of this post.>> Christina<<<<Pierce worked tirelessly to present infant adoption as a lovingoption and played a major role in conceiving the Infant AdoptionAwareness Act. This policy, part of the Children's Health Act of 2000,created the Infant Adoption Awareness Training Program, which trainshealth and pregnancy counselors in presenting adoption as a positiveoption for unplanned pregnancy>>>Pierce brought insurmountable misery to countless US mothers in hisquest to encourage more infant adoption in the early 80's when it wasall but over in most other parts of the western world. His legacy willlive on eternally for them.DiWas it a gun, or a knife that he held to these mother's heads to force themtorelinquish?While I might not agree with his position on most adoption issues, I dobelievehe encouraged adoption because he felt it was the best thing for thechildren.Whether or not that was actually the case, it's hard not to respect someonewhohas such high regard for children. The man was a gentleman. While the open records community might just breath a collective sigh ofreliefthat their most outspoken adversary will now be silent, I doubt that most arecelebrating his death. I find it incredibly tacky and insensitive to onlypoint out negative things. I hope when your time comes, people don't sitaround thinking of all of the things they feel you did wrong, or that theydisagreed with you about. I hope you're shown more respect than that. Mostpeople (Mr. Pierce most definitely included) deserve it.>> "CG" wrote in message news:4004a1c0$1_7@corp.newsgroups.com...> > Can anyone confirm or deny the rumor of his passing? I just received an> > email on this today.> > --> > ChristinaKathy, born Renee Karyn RacinePermanent good can never be the outcome of untruth and violence.--Mahatma GandhiPeace is not merely a distant goal that we seek, but a means by which wearriveat that goal.--Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. I agree, he was always a gentleman on this group and I believe he respected others opinions,

But never respected them quite enough to support their human right to
know their own identity. A charming man in every respect.

Di

even though he didn't always agree with them. There are many who still believe in closed records, I see it all the time, even though I disagree, that is their opinion and they are entitled to it. It doesn't make them a bad person, or even mean they are wrong. The chocolate and vanilla theory, you can't make one like the other. In his defense, I never saw him hostile, nasty, condemning or demeaning. He seemed like a tolerant man. He deserves respect, even if you disagreed with him.

Kathy T

01-14-2004, 10:45 PM

>Are you a member of Bastard Nation? If so, tell that to the countlessadoptees who died never knowing where they came from or their trueidentities during his reign as King of closed records. I'm afraid mysympathy lies with them.He was directly responsible for their misery.Di

I am a member of BN. While I realize that Pierce was an advocate of closed
records, I repeat that he himself is not responsible for closing them in the
first place. In addition, I doubt any true human being rejoices in the death,
especially from a debilitating terminal illness of their adversary. I find
that rejoicing in anyones death (except for certain murderers) is beyond
inhumane, and quite rude.
Kathy, born Renee Karyn Racine

Permanent good can never be the outcome of untruth and violence.
--Mahatma Gandhi
Peace is not merely a distant goal that we seek, but a means by which we arrive
at that goal.
--Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.

Kathy T

01-14-2004, 10:46 PM

>Subject: Re: Bill Pierce? ConfirmedFrom: patrice68@bigpond.com.au (Dian)Date: 1/14/04 9:04 PM Pacific Standard TimeMessage-id: <c599139c.0401142104.5097b217@posting.google.com>chosenchildinc1@aol.com (Chosenchildinc1) wrote in messagenews:<20040114165401.26415.00000016@mb-m05.aol.com>...Subject: Re: Bill Pierce? ConfirmedFrom: reneekarynracine@aol.comhomesafe (Kathy T)Date: 1/14/2004 6:12 PM Newfoundland Standard TimeMessage-id: <20040114164206.29591.00002566@mb-m02.aol.com>>Subject: Re: Bill Pierce? Confirmed>From: patrice68@bigpond.com.au (Dian)>Date: 1/14/04 2:47 AM Pacific Standard Time>Message-id: <c599139c.0401140247.2eeef27a@posting.google.com>>>"CG" <kspeach@yahoo.com> wrote in message>news:<4004a338$1_7@corp.newsgroups.com>...>> Never mind......found it;>> http://www.adoptioncouncil.org/>>>> This part could be interesting......>> ****The National Council For Adoption invites tributes to its founding>> president, William L. Pierce, for inclusion on its website,>> www.adoptioncouncil.org . Please email submissions to lallen@infantadopt.org>> , including your name, affiliation, and title, or association with Bill>> Pierce. ******>>>>>> No tears were shed in the making of this post.>>>> Christina>><<<<Pierce worked tirelessly to present infant adoption as a loving>option and played a major role in conceiving the Infant Adoption>Awareness Act. This policy, part of the Children's Health Act of 2000,>created the Infant Adoption Awareness Training Program, which trains>health and pregnancy counselors in presenting adoption as a positive>option for unplanned pregnancy>>>>>Pierce brought insurmountable misery to countless US mothers in his>quest to encourage more infant adoption in the early 80's when it was>all but over in most other parts of the western world. His legacy will>live on eternally for them.>>Di>Was it a gun, or a knife that he held to these mother's heads to forcethemtorelinquish?While I might not agree with his position on most adoption issues, I dobelievehe encouraged adoption because he felt it was the best thing for thechildren.Whether or not that was actually the case, it's hard not to respectsomeonewhohas such high regard for children. The man was a gentleman. While the open records community might just breath a collective sigh ofreliefthat their most outspoken adversary will now be silent, I doubt that mostarecelebrating his death. I find it incredibly tacky and insensitive to onlypoint out negative things. I hope when your time comes, people don't sitaround thinking of all of the things they feel you did wrong, or that theydisagreed with you about. I hope you're shown more respect than that.Mostpeople (Mr. Pierce most definitely included) deserve it.>>>>> "CG" wrote in message news:4004a1c0$1_7@corp.newsgroups.com...>> > Can anyone confirm or deny the rumor of his passing? I just receivedan>> > email on this today.>> > -->> > ChristinaKathy, born Renee Karyn RacinePermanent good can never be the outcome of untruth and violence.--Mahatma GandhiPeace is not merely a distant goal that we seek, but a means by which wearriveat that goal.--Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. I agree, he was always a gentleman on this group and I believe he respected others opinions,But never respected them quite enough to support their human right toknow their own identity. A charming man in every respect.Di

He did not agree with their stance, yet still respected their opinions. That
is what the world is made up of, people on one side or another of an issue.
Again, I'll ask, do you react this way when other adversaries die? Are you
expecting those who oppose you to rejoice when you pass?

even though he didn't always agree with them. There are many who still believe in closed records, I see it all the time, even though I disagree, that is their opinion and they are entitled to it. It doesn'tmake them a bad person, or even mean they are wrong. The chocolate and vanilla theory, you can't make one like the other. Inhis defense, I never saw him hostile, nasty, condemning or demeaning. He seemed like a tolerant man. He deserves respect, even if you disagreed with him.

Kathy, born Renee Karyn Racine

Permanent good can never be the outcome of untruth and violence.
--Mahatma Gandhi
Peace is not merely a distant goal that we seek, but a means by which we arrive
at that goal.
--Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.

Dian

01-15-2004, 03:05 AM

reneekarynracine@aol.comhomesafe (Kathy T) wrote in message news:<20040115014522.01395.00000059@mb-m03.aol.com>...Are you a member of Bastard Nation? If so, tell that to the countlessadoptees who died never knowing where they came from or their trueidentities during his reign as King of closed records. I'm afraid mysympathy lies with them.He was directly responsible for their misery.Di I am a member of BN. While I realize that Pierce was an advocate of closed records, I repeat that he himself is not responsible for closing them in the first place.

Of course he wasn't, but he WAS responsible for keeping them closed
for 20-25 years longer than the rest of the world.

In addition, I doubt any true human being rejoices in the death, especially from a debilitating terminal illness of their adversary. I find that rejoicing in anyones death (except for certain murderers) is beyond inhumane, and quite rude. Kathy, born Renee Karyn Racine

Nobody is rejoicing in his death. But to now make him out to be some
kind of National hero after his shameful lifelong fight to oppose
other people's human rights is absolutely mindboggling. Especially
when it comes from the very people whose rights he was opposing, and
even worse, who still do not have those rights, because of him.

Di

Permanent good can never be the outcome of untruth and violence. --Mahatma Gandhi Peace is not merely a distant goal that we seek, but a means by which we arrive at that goal. --Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.

Dian

01-15-2004, 03:14 AM

reneekarynracine@aol.comhomesafe (Kathy T) wrote in message news:<20040115014656.01395.00000060@mb-m03.aol.com>...Subject: Re: Bill Pierce? ConfirmedFrom: patrice68@bigpond.com.au (Dian)Date: 1/14/04 9:04 PM Pacific Standard TimeMessage-id: <c599139c.0401142104.5097b217@posting.google.com>chosenchildinc1@aol.com (Chosenchildinc1) wrote in messagenews:<20040114165401.26415.00000016@mb-m05.aol.com>... >Subject: Re: Bill Pierce? Confirmed >From: reneekarynracine@aol.comhomesafe (Kathy T) >Date: 1/14/2004 6:12 PM Newfoundland Standard Time >Message-id: <20040114164206.29591.00002566@mb-m02.aol.com> > >>Subject: Re: Bill Pierce? Confirmed >>From: patrice68@bigpond.com.au (Dian) >>Date: 1/14/04 2:47 AM Pacific Standard Time >>Message-id: <c599139c.0401140247.2eeef27a@posting.google.com> >> >>"CG" <kspeach@yahoo.com> wrote in message >>news:<4004a338$1_7@corp.newsgroups.com>... >>> Never mind......found it; >>> http://www.adoptioncouncil.org/ >>> >>> This part could be interesting...... >>> ****The National Council For Adoption invites tributes to its founding >>> president, William L. Pierce, for inclusion on its website, >>> www.adoptioncouncil.org . Please email submissions to lallen@infantadopt.org >>> , including your name, affiliation, and title, or association with Bill >>> Pierce. ****** >>> >>> >>> No tears were shed in the making of this post. >>> >>> Christina >> >><<<<Pierce worked tirelessly to present infant adoption as a loving >>option and played a major role in conceiving the Infant Adoption >>Awareness Act. This policy, part of the Children's Health Act of 2000, >>created the Infant Adoption Awareness Training Program, which trains >>health and pregnancy counselors in presenting adoption as a positive >>option for unplanned pregnancy>>> >> >>Pierce brought insurmountable misery to countless US mothers in his >>quest to encourage more infant adoption in the early 80's when it was >>all but over in most other parts of the western world. His legacy will >>live on eternally for them. >> >>Di >> > >Was it a gun, or a knife that he held to these mother's heads to force them >to >relinquish? > >While I might not agree with his position on most adoption issues, I do >believe >he encouraged adoption because he felt it was the best thing for the >children. >Whether or not that was actually the case, it's hard not to respect someone >who >has such high regard for children. The man was a gentleman. > > While the open records community might just breath a collective sigh of >relief >that their most outspoken adversary will now be silent, I doubt that most are >celebrating his death. I find it incredibly tacky and insensitive to only >point out negative things. I hope when your time comes, people don't sit >around thinking of all of the things they feel you did wrong, or that they >disagreed with you about. I hope you're shown more respect than that. Most >people (Mr. Pierce most definitely included) deserve it. > > > >> >>> >>> "CG" wrote in message news:4004a1c0$1_7@corp.newsgroups.com... >>> > Can anyone confirm or deny the rumor of his passing? I just received an >>> > email on this today. >>> > -- >>> > Christina > >Kathy, born Renee Karyn Racine > >Permanent good can never be the outcome of untruth and violence. >--Mahatma Gandhi >Peace is not merely a distant goal that we seek, but a means by which we >arrive >at that goal. >--Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. > > > > > > > I agree, he was always a gentleman on this group and I believe he respected others opinions,But never respected them quite enough to support their human right toknow their own identity. A charming man in every respect.Di He did not agree with their stance, yet still respected their opinions. That is what the world is made up of, people on one side or another of an issue. Again, I'll ask, do you react this way when other adversaries die? Are you expecting those who oppose you to rejoice when you pass?
I'm sure plenty of people will rejoice when I die. What's you point?

Di

even though he didn't always agree with them. There are many who still believe in closed records, I see it all the time, even though I disagree, that is their opinion and they are entitled to it. It doesn't make them a bad person, or even mean they are wrong. The chocolate and vanilla theory, you can't make one like the other. In his defense, I never saw him hostile, nasty, condemning or demeaning. He seemed like a tolerant man. He deserves respect, even if you disagreed with him. Kathy, born Renee Karyn Racine Permanent good can never be the outcome of untruth and violence. --Mahatma Gandhi Peace is not merely a distant goal that we seek, but a means by which we arrive at that goal. --Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.

helicon

01-15-2004, 04:57 AM

"Kathy T" <reneekarynracine@aol.comhomesafe> wrote in message
news:20040115014656.01395.00000060@mb-m03.aol.com...Subject: Re: Bill Pierce? ConfirmedFrom: patrice68@bigpond.com.au (Dian)Date: 1/14/04 9:04 PM Pacific Standard TimeMessage-id: <c599139c.0401142104.5097b217@posting.google.com>chosenchildinc1@aol.com (Chosenchildinc1) wrote in messagenews:<20040114165401.26415.00000016@mb-m05.aol.com>... >Subject: Re: Bill Pierce? Confirmed >From: reneekarynracine@aol.comhomesafe (Kathy T) >Date: 1/14/2004 6:12 PM Newfoundland Standard Time >Message-id: <20040114164206.29591.00002566@mb-m02.aol.com> > >>Subject: Re: Bill Pierce? Confirmed >>From: patrice68@bigpond.com.au (Dian) >>Date: 1/14/04 2:47 AM Pacific Standard Time >>Message-id: <c599139c.0401140247.2eeef27a@posting.google.com> >> >>"CG" <kspeach@yahoo.com> wrote in message >>news:<4004a338$1_7@corp.newsgroups.com>... >>> Never mind......found it; >>> http://www.adoptioncouncil.org/ >>> >>> This part could be interesting...... >>> ****The National Council For Adoption invites tributes to its
founding >>> president, William L. Pierce, for inclusion on its website, >>> www.adoptioncouncil.org . Please email submissions to lallen@infantadopt.org >>> , including your name, affiliation, and title, or association with
Bill >>> Pierce. ****** >>> >>> >>> No tears were shed in the making of this post. >>> >>> Christina >> >><<<<Pierce worked tirelessly to present infant adoption as a loving >>option and played a major role in conceiving the Infant Adoption >>Awareness Act. This policy, part of the Children's Health Act of
2000, >>created the Infant Adoption Awareness Training Program, which trains >>health and pregnancy counselors in presenting adoption as a positive >>option for unplanned pregnancy>>> >> >>Pierce brought insurmountable misery to countless US mothers in his >>quest to encourage more infant adoption in the early 80's when it was >>all but over in most other parts of the western world. His legacy
will >>live on eternally for them. >> >>Di >> > >Was it a gun, or a knife that he held to these mother's heads to forcethem >to >relinquish? > >While I might not agree with his position on most adoption issues, I
do >believe >he encouraged adoption because he felt it was the best thing for the >children. >Whether or not that was actually the case, it's hard not to respectsomeone >who >has such high regard for children. The man was a gentleman. > > While the open records community might just breath a collective sigh
of >relief >that their most outspoken adversary will now be silent, I doubt that
mostare >celebrating his death. I find it incredibly tacky and insensitive to
only >point out negative things. I hope when your time comes, people don't
sit >around thinking of all of the things they feel you did wrong, or that
they >disagreed with you about. I hope you're shown more respect than that.Most >people (Mr. Pierce most definitely included) deserve it. > > > >> >>> >>> "CG" wrote in message news:4004a1c0$1_7@corp.newsgroups.com... >>> > Can anyone confirm or deny the rumor of his passing? I just
receivedan >>> > email on this today. >>> > -- >>> > Christina > >Kathy, born Renee Karyn Racine > >Permanent good can never be the outcome of untruth and violence. >--Mahatma Gandhi >Peace is not merely a distant goal that we seek, but a means by which
we >arrive >at that goal. >--Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. > > > > > > > I agree, he was always a gentleman on this group and I believe he
respected others opinions,But never respected them quite enough to support their human right toknow their own identity. A charming man in every respect.Di He did not agree with their stance, yet still respected their opinions.
That is what the world is made up of, people on one side or another of an
issue. Again, I'll ask, do you react this way when other adversaries die? Are you expecting those who oppose you to rejoice when you pass?

When your 'enemy' dies before you, you have already 'beaten' him.

I only knew Bill Pierce on a very superficial level. I would have argued
with him here on occasion but that's all. I never met him.

Ireland has moved on considerably in adoption matters, and I considered some
of his views to be archaic, especially in the area of 'rights to
information'.

He was, as I said, unfailingly courteous. That he could respect people whose
views were diametrically opposed to his own showed the quality of the man.

Nil nisi bonum.

Helen

even though he didn't always agree with them. There are many who still believe in closed records, I see it all the time, even though
I disagree, that is their opinion and they are entitled to it. It doesn'tmake them a bad person, or even mean they are wrong. The chocolate and vanilla theory, you can't make one like the other.
Inhis defense, I never saw him hostile, nasty, condemning or demeaning. He
seemed like a tolerant man. He deserves respect, even if you disagreed with
him. Kathy, born Renee Karyn Racine Permanent good can never be the outcome of untruth and violence. --Mahatma Gandhi Peace is not merely a distant goal that we seek, but a means by which we
arrive at that goal. --Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.

kat

01-15-2004, 06:22 AM

"Dian" <patrice68@bigpond.com.au> wrote in message
news:c599139c.0401150305.651de98b@posting.google.c om... reneekarynracine@aol.comhomesafe (Kathy T) wrote in message
news:<20040115014522.01395.00000059@mb-m03.aol.com>...Are you a member of Bastard Nation? If so, tell that to the countlessadoptees who died never knowing where they came from or their trueidentities during his reign as King of closed records. I'm afraid mysympathy lies with them.He was directly responsible for their misery.Di I am a member of BN. While I realize that Pierce was an advocate of
closed records, I repeat that he himself is not responsible for closing them in
the first place. Of course he wasn't, but he WAS responsible for keeping them closed for 20-25 years longer than the rest of the world. In addition, I doubt any true human being rejoices in the death, especially from a debilitating terminal illness of their adversary. I
find that rejoicing in anyones death (except for certain murderers) is beyond inhumane, and quite rude. Kathy, born Renee Karyn Racine Nobody is rejoicing in his death. But to now make him out to be some kind of National hero after his shameful lifelong fight to oppose other people's human rights is absolutely mindboggling. Especially when it comes from the very people whose rights he was opposing, and even worse, who still do not have those rights, because of him. Di

I agree with both of you. Closed records were but a part of his legacy. He
did accomplish good in other areas of adoption. Most people are a complex
mix. I don't think it is necessary to focus only on one or the other. I see
nothing wrong with acknowledging *both* when someone has passed on. Death
does not automatically render one a saint.

Kathy 1

Kathy 1

pb...

01-15-2004, 06:56 AM

On 15 Jan 2004 03:05:49 -0800, patrice68@bigpond.com.au (Dian) writes:
reneekarynracine@aol.comhomesafe (Kathy T) wrote in message news:<20040115014522.01395.00000059@mb-m03.aol.com>...Are you a member of Bastard Nation? If so, tell that to thecountless adoptees who died never knowing where they camefrom or their true identities during his reign as King of closedrecords. I'm afraid my sympathy lies with them. He was directlyresponsible for their misery.Di I am a member of BN. While I realize that Pierce was an advocate of closed records, I repeat that he himself is not responsible for closing them in the first place.Of course he wasn't, but he WAS responsible for keeping them closedfor 20-25 years longer than the rest of the world. In addition, I doubt any true human being rejoices in the death, especially from a debilitating terminal illness of their adversary. I find that rejoicing in anyones death (except for certain murderers) is beyond inhumane, and quite rude. Kathy, born Renee Karyn RacineNobody is rejoicing in his death. But to now make him out to be somekind of National hero after his shameful lifelong fight to opposeother people's human rights is absolutely mindboggling. Especiallywhen it comes from the very people whose rights he was opposing,and even worse, who still do not have those rights, because of him.Di

Very well said, Di. Right on the mark.

pb...

http://bastards.org/bb/7.UAA.html

Melinda Walmsley

01-15-2004, 08:07 AM

> Nobody is rejoicing in his death. But to now make him out to be some kind of National hero after his shameful lifelong fight to oppose other people's human rights is absolutely mindboggling. Especially when it comes from the very people whose rights he was opposing, and even worse, who still do not have those rights, because of him. Di

The whole topic reminds me of something the munchkins said in the
Wizard of Oz, when the house landed on the wicked witch. But I'm
from Kansas, so what can I say. That movie is a part of my heritage.

Ron Morgan

01-15-2004, 09:07 AM

"Dian" <patrice68@bigpond.com.au> wrote in message
news:c599139c.0401150305.651de98b@posting.google.c om... reneekarynracine@aol.comhomesafe (Kathy T) wrote in message
news:<20040115014522.01395.00000059@mb-m03.aol.com>... Nobody is rejoicing in his death. But to now make him out to be some kind of National hero after his shameful lifelong fight to oppose other people's human rights is absolutely mindboggling. Especially when it comes from the very people whose rights he was opposing, and even worse, who still do not have those rights, because of him. Di

My remarks weren't intended to lift Pierce to sainthood, or elevate him to
national hero. As if my remarks on alt.adoption could do such a thing.
Pierce had been retired from NCFA for years, and his direct influence had
waned considerably. His avuncular persona on alt.adoption stood in stark
contrast to his take-no-prisoners style as a lobbyist. If you recall the
stories circulating in the press back in the presidential campaign of 2000
about John McCain's temper, about a uncensored tantrum McCain threw at
someone in his office, you probably didn't know that Pierce was the
recipient. If you deal with politicians on a day to day basis, as I do, you
know how difficult it is to get one to go on tilt. You have to be a
masterful button pusher to manipulate a US Senator in such a way as to
influence his candidacy.

I had little respect for his position, but I had, and have, a great respect
for his methodology. I had to, because to ignore his skill was to surrender
the field.

As I mentioned, Pierce had been retired for years, yet we're no closer to
achieving open records than we were when he was ED of NCFA. This has much
less to do with Pierce than it does a failure in leadership in the movement
to open records. Instead of growing our base of support using the time
honored methods of community organizing or the newer Howard Dean style
fundraising and base growing opportunies of the internet , we spend our
energies fighting over which point of the triad is the most victimized, or
conversely, denigrating those with a legitimate grievance for the harm that
adoption has caused them. We coset ourselves into self-selected support
group ghettoes, while the bulk of the population, the emillions we need to
sway if we want a political solution, assumes we can access our records
whenever we feel like it. We, in adoption world, have formed a giant
dysfunctional "healing" circle, facing inward, and we talk on and on with
ourselves. Bill made us face outwards, to the world, and that was what my
remarks were intended to address.

I wish I could attend Bill's funeral. I'd love to shmooze with the Senators,
Congressmen, Laura Bush, Hillary Clinton, and others who will attend, to
personalize the struggle for open records the way that Bill personalized the
struggle against. I hope that Marley does. Because that's where the action
will be, not on alt.adoption in some interminable thread on who's got the
biggest and most legitimate wound.

Ron
Proud Bastard

Permanent good can never be the outcome of untruth and violence. --Mahatma Gandhi Peace is not merely a distant goal that we seek, but a means by which we
arrive at that goal. --Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.

Kathy

01-15-2004, 09:38 AM

>Subject: Re: Bill Pierce? ConfirmedFrom: "Ron Morgan" rhyzome1@earthlink.netDate: 1/15/04 9:07 AM Pacific Standard TimeMessage-id: <VMzNb.10597$1e.4831@newsread2.news.pas.earthlink.n et>"Dian" <patrice68@bigpond.com.au> wrote in messagenews:c599139c.0401150305.651de98b@posting.g oogle.com... reneekarynracine@aol.comhomesafe (Kathy T) wrote in messagenews:<20040115014522.01395.00000059@mb-m03.aol.com>... Nobody is rejoicing in his death. But to now make him out to be some kind of National hero after his shameful lifelong fight to oppose other people's human rights is absolutely mindboggling. Especially when it comes from the very people whose rights he was opposing, and even worse, who still do not have those rights, because of him. DiMy remarks weren't intended to lift Pierce to sainthood, or elevate him tonational hero. As if my remarks on alt.adoption could do such a thing.Pierce had been retired from NCFA for years, and his direct influence hadwaned considerably. His avuncular persona on alt.adoption stood in starkcontrast to his take-no-prisoners style as a lobbyist. If you recall thestories circulating in the press back in the presidential campaign of 2000about John McCain's temper, about a uncensored tantrum McCain threw atsomeone in his office, you probably didn't know that Pierce was therecipient. If you deal with politicians on a day to day basis, as I do, youknow how difficult it is to get one to go on tilt. You have to be amasterful button pusher to manipulate a US Senator in such a way as toinfluence his candidacy.I had little respect for his position, but I had, and have, a great respectfor his methodology. I had to, because to ignore his skill was to surrenderthe field.As I mentioned, Pierce had been retired for years, yet we're no closer toachieving open records than we were when he was ED of NCFA. This has muchless to do with Pierce than it does a failure in leadership in the movementto open records. Instead of growing our base of support using the timehonored methods of community organizing or the newer Howard Dean stylefundraising and base growing opportunies of the internet , we spend ourenergies fighting over which point of the triad is the most victimized, orconversely, denigrating those with a legitimate grievance for the harm thatadoption has caused them. We coset ourselves into self-selected supportgroup ghettoes, while the bulk of the population, the emillions we need tosway if we want a political solution, assumes we can access our recordswhenever we feel like it. We, in adoption world, have formed a giantdysfunctional "healing" circle, facing inward, and we talk on and on withourselves. Bill made us face outwards, to the world, and that was what myremarks were intended to address.I wish I could attend Bill's funeral. I'd love to shmooze with the Senators,Congressmen, Laura Bush, Hillary Clinton, and others who will attend, topersonalize the struggle for open records the way that Bill personalized thestruggle against. I hope that Marley does. Because that's where the actionwill be, not on alt.adoption in some interminable thread on who's got thebiggest and most legitimate wound.RonProud Bastard

Bravo!!!

Diane Welfare, "she describes the US market as a "$US1.4 billion business in
baby trafficking". ~~121603
http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2003/12/15/1071336884771.html

Rhiannon

01-15-2004, 10:06 AM

pb... <woodlark-99@newsguy.com> wrote in message news:<ucad00d47pp4ri10njjfdpr2r9cauihr4a@4ax.com>... On 15 Jan 2004 03:05:49 -0800, patrice68@bigpond.com.au (Dian) writes:reneekarynracine@aol.comhomesafe (Kathy T) wrote in message news:<20040115014522.01395.00000059@mb-m03.aol.com>... >Are you a member of Bastard Nation? If so, tell that to the >countless adoptees who died never knowing where they came >from or their true identities during his reign as King of closed >records. I'm afraid my sympathy lies with them. He was directly >responsible for their misery. > >Di I am a member of BN. While I realize that Pierce was an advocate of closed records, I repeat that he himself is not responsible for closing them in the first place.Of course he wasn't, but he WAS responsible for keeping them closedfor 20-25 years longer than the rest of the world. In addition, I doubt any true human being rejoices in the death, especially from a debilitating terminal illness of their adversary. I find that rejoicing in anyones death (except for certain murderers) is beyond inhumane, and quite rude. Kathy, born Renee Karyn RacineNobody is rejoicing in his death. But to now make him out to be somekind of National hero after his shameful lifelong fight to opposeother people's human rights is absolutely mindboggling. Especiallywhen it comes from the very people whose rights he was opposing,and even worse, who still do not have those rights, because of him.Di Very well said, Di. Right on the mark.

It is right on the mark.
But I don't quite understand why Di feels the need to spread the word
around that the spokes-folk for BN are making the late Bill out to be
a national hero, when they ain't doing that thing.

Rh. pb... http://bastards.org/bb/7.UAA.html

helicon

01-15-2004, 10:18 AM

Top: Great post, Ron.

Helen

"Ron Morgan" <rhyzome1@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:VMzNb.10597$1e.4831@newsread2.news.pas.earthl ink.net... "Dian" <patrice68@bigpond.com.au> wrote in message news:c599139c.0401150305.651de98b@posting.google.c om... reneekarynracine@aol.comhomesafe (Kathy T) wrote in message news:<20040115014522.01395.00000059@mb-m03.aol.com>... Nobody is rejoicing in his death. But to now make him out to be some kind of National hero after his shameful lifelong fight to oppose other people's human rights is absolutely mindboggling. Especially when it comes from the very people whose rights he was opposing, and even worse, who still do not have those rights, because of him. Di My remarks weren't intended to lift Pierce to sainthood, or elevate him to national hero. As if my remarks on alt.adoption could do such a thing. Pierce had been retired from NCFA for years, and his direct influence had waned considerably. His avuncular persona on alt.adoption stood in stark contrast to his take-no-prisoners style as a lobbyist. If you recall the stories circulating in the press back in the presidential campaign of 2000 about John McCain's temper, about a uncensored tantrum McCain threw at someone in his office, you probably didn't know that Pierce was the recipient. If you deal with politicians on a day to day basis, as I do,
you know how difficult it is to get one to go on tilt. You have to be a masterful button pusher to manipulate a US Senator in such a way as to influence his candidacy. I had little respect for his position, but I had, and have, a great
respect for his methodology. I had to, because to ignore his skill was to
surrender the field. As I mentioned, Pierce had been retired for years, yet we're no closer to achieving open records than we were when he was ED of NCFA. This has much less to do with Pierce than it does a failure in leadership in the
movement to open records. Instead of growing our base of support using the time honored methods of community organizing or the newer Howard Dean style fundraising and base growing opportunies of the internet , we spend our energies fighting over which point of the triad is the most victimized, or conversely, denigrating those with a legitimate grievance for the harm
that adoption has caused them. We coset ourselves into self-selected support group ghettoes, while the bulk of the population, the emillions we need to sway if we want a political solution, assumes we can access our records whenever we feel like it. We, in adoption world, have formed a giant dysfunctional "healing" circle, facing inward, and we talk on and on with ourselves. Bill made us face outwards, to the world, and that was what my remarks were intended to address. I wish I could attend Bill's funeral. I'd love to shmooze with the
Senators, Congressmen, Laura Bush, Hillary Clinton, and others who will attend, to personalize the struggle for open records the way that Bill personalized
the struggle against. I hope that Marley does. Because that's where the action will be, not on alt.adoption in some interminable thread on who's got the biggest and most legitimate wound. Ron Proud Bastard Permanent good can never be the outcome of untruth and violence. --Mahatma Gandhi Peace is not merely a distant goal that we seek, but a means by which
we arrive at that goal. --Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.

Ron Morgan

01-15-2004, 10:18 AM

"Rhiannon" <sarallewellyn@gosympatico.ca> wrote in message
news:dafc70.0401151006.7f518769@posting.google.com ... pb... <woodlark-99@newsguy.com> wrote in message
news:<ucad00d47pp4ri10njjfdpr2r9cauihr4a@4ax.com>... On 15 Jan 2004 03:05:49 -0800, patrice68@bigpond.com.au (Dian) writes:reneekarynracine@aol.comhomesafe (Kathy T) wrote in message news:<20040115014522.01395.00000059@mb-m03.aol.com>...> >Are you a member of Bastard Nation? If so, tell that to the> >countless adoptees who died never knowing where they came> >from or their true identities during his reign as King of closed> >records. I'm afraid my sympathy lies with them. He was directly> >responsible for their misery.> >> >Di>> I am a member of BN. While I realize that Pierce was an advocate> of closed records, I repeat that he himself is not responsible for> closing them in the first place.Of course he wasn't, but he WAS responsible for keeping them closedfor 20-25 years longer than the rest of the world. In addition, I doubt any true human being rejoices in the death,> especially from a debilitating terminal illness of their adversary.> I find that rejoicing in anyones death (except for certain murderers)> is beyond inhumane, and quite rude.> Kathy, born Renee Karyn Racine>Nobody is rejoicing in his death. But to now make him out to be somekind of National hero after his shameful lifelong fight to opposeother people's human rights is absolutely mindboggling. Especiallywhen it comes from the very people whose rights he was opposing,and even worse, who still do not have those rights, because of him.Di Very well said, Di. Right on the mark. It is right on the mark. But I don't quite understand why Di feels the need to spread the word around that the spokes-folk for BN are making the late Bill out to be a national hero, when they ain't doing that thing.

I'm not a spokesperson for Bastard Nation. I'm a member, but I haven't held
an office with them since 2001.

Ron Rh. pb... http://bastards.org/bb/7.UAA.html

Marley Greiner

01-15-2004, 10:47 AM

Top Posting: Thank you thank you thank you Ronaldo!

Marley

"Ron Morgan" <rhyzome1@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:VMzNb.10597$1e.4831@newsread2.news.pas.earthl ink.net... "Dian" <patrice68@bigpond.com.au> wrote in message news:c599139c.0401150305.651de98b@posting.google.c om... reneekarynracine@aol.comhomesafe (Kathy T) wrote in message news:<20040115014522.01395.00000059@mb-m03.aol.com>... Nobody is rejoicing in his death. But to now make him out to be some kind of National hero after his shameful lifelong fight to oppose other people's human rights is absolutely mindboggling. Especially when it comes from the very people whose rights he was opposing, and even worse, who still do not have those rights, because of him. Di My remarks weren't intended to lift Pierce to sainthood, or elevate him to national hero. As if my remarks on alt.adoption could do such a thing. Pierce had been retired from NCFA for years, and his direct influence had waned considerably. His avuncular persona on alt.adoption stood in stark contrast to his take-no-prisoners style as a lobbyist. If you recall the stories circulating in the press back in the presidential campaign of 2000 about John McCain's temper, about a uncensored tantrum McCain threw at someone in his office, you probably didn't know that Pierce was the recipient. If you deal with politicians on a day to day basis, as I do,
you know how difficult it is to get one to go on tilt. You have to be a masterful button pusher to manipulate a US Senator in such a way as to influence his candidacy. I had little respect for his position, but I had, and have, a great
respect for his methodology. I had to, because to ignore his skill was to
surrender the field. As I mentioned, Pierce had been retired for years, yet we're no closer to achieving open records than we were when he was ED of NCFA. This has much less to do with Pierce than it does a failure in leadership in the
movement to open records. Instead of growing our base of support using the time honored methods of community organizing or the newer Howard Dean style fundraising and base growing opportunies of the internet , we spend our energies fighting over which point of the triad is the most victimized, or conversely, denigrating those with a legitimate grievance for the harm
that adoption has caused them. We coset ourselves into self-selected support group ghettoes, while the bulk of the population, the emillions we need to sway if we want a political solution, assumes we can access our records whenever we feel like it. We, in adoption world, have formed a giant dysfunctional "healing" circle, facing inward, and we talk on and on with ourselves. Bill made us face outwards, to the world, and that was what my remarks were intended to address. I wish I could attend Bill's funeral. I'd love to shmooze with the
Senators, Congressmen, Laura Bush, Hillary Clinton, and others who will attend, to personalize the struggle for open records the way that Bill personalized
the struggle against. I hope that Marley does. Because that's where the action will be, not on alt.adoption in some interminable thread on who's got the biggest and most legitimate wound. Ron Proud Bastard Permanent good can never be the outcome of untruth and violence. --Mahatma Gandhi Peace is not merely a distant goal that we seek, but a means by which
we arrive at that goal. --Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.

Dian

01-15-2004, 01:12 PM

pb... <woodlark-99@newsguy.com> wrote in message news:<ucad00d47pp4ri10njjfdpr2r9cauihr4a@4ax.com>... On 15 Jan 2004 03:05:49 -0800, patrice68@bigpond.com.au (Dian) writes:reneekarynracine@aol.comhomesafe (Kathy T) wrote in message news:<20040115014522.01395.00000059@mb-m03.aol.com>... >Are you a member of Bastard Nation? If so, tell that to the >countless adoptees who died never knowing where they came >from or their true identities during his reign as King of closed >records. I'm afraid my sympathy lies with them. He was directly >responsible for their misery. > >Di I am a member of BN. While I realize that Pierce was an advocate of closed records, I repeat that he himself is not responsible for closing them in the first place.Of course he wasn't, but he WAS responsible for keeping them closedfor 20-25 years longer than the rest of the world. In addition, I doubt any true human being rejoices in the death, especially from a debilitating terminal illness of their adversary. I find that rejoicing in anyones death (except for certain murderers) is beyond inhumane, and quite rude. Kathy, born Renee Karyn RacineNobody is rejoicing in his death. But to now make him out to be somekind of National hero after his shameful lifelong fight to opposeother people's human rights is absolutely mindboggling. Especiallywhen it comes from the very people whose rights he was opposing,and even worse, who still do not have those rights, because of him.Di Very well said, Di. Right on the mark. pb...
Jean Paton will be weeping in her grave. What a betrayal.

http://www.bastards.org/bq/bq19/Jean_Paton.html
http://www.geocities.com/orphanvoyage1953/jean.html
ORPHAN VOYAGE MEMORIAL
Dedicated to adoptees and birthparents who died before the chance of
being reunited with the one they lost to adoption.

Lest we forget.
Di

Rhiannon

01-15-2004, 02:22 PM

"Ron Morgan" <rhyzome1@earthlink.net> wrote in message news:<bQANb.10911$1e.7580@newsread2.news.pas.earthlink.n et>... "Rhiannon" <sarallewellyn@gosympatico.ca> wrote in message news:dafc70.0401151006.7f518769@posting.google.com ... pb... <woodlark-99@newsguy.com> wrote in message news:<ucad00d47pp4ri10njjfdpr2r9cauihr4a@4ax.com>... On 15 Jan 2004 03:05:49 -0800, patrice68@bigpond.com.au (Dian) writes: >reneekarynracine@aol.comhomesafe (Kathy T) wrote in message news: ><20040115014522.01395.00000059@mb-m03.aol.com>... >> >Are you a member of Bastard Nation? If so, tell that to the >> >countless adoptees who died never knowing where they came >> >from or their true identities during his reign as King of closed >> >records. I'm afraid my sympathy lies with them. He was directly >> >responsible for their misery. >> > >> >Di >> >> I am a member of BN. While I realize that Pierce was an advocate >> of closed records, I repeat that he himself is not responsible for >> closing them in the first place. > >Of course he wasn't, but he WAS responsible for keeping them closed >for 20-25 years longer than the rest of the world. > > > In addition, I doubt any true human being rejoices in the death, >> especially from a debilitating terminal illness of their adversary. >> I find that rejoicing in anyones death (except for certain murderers) >> is beyond inhumane, and quite rude. >> Kathy, born Renee Karyn Racine >> > >Nobody is rejoicing in his death. But to now make him out to be some >kind of National hero after his shameful lifelong fight to oppose >other people's human rights is absolutely mindboggling. Especially >when it comes from the very people whose rights he was opposing, >and even worse, who still do not have those rights, because of him. > >Di Very well said, Di. Right on the mark. > > It is right on the mark. But I don't quite understand why Di feels the need to spread the word around that the spokes-folk for BN are making the late Bill out to be a national hero, when they ain't doing that thing. I'm not a spokesperson for Bastard Nation. I'm a member, but I haven't held an office with them since 2001.

I think it was 'heads of Bastard Nation', actually.
Whatever.
Great posts, Ron.

Rh.

Ron Rh. pb... http://bastards.org/bb/7.UAA.html

Dian

01-15-2004, 03:32 PM

"kat" <katlat24@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:<bu67o1$duor9$1@ID-203097.news.uni-berlin.de>... "Dian" <patrice68@bigpond.com.au> wrote in message news:c599139c.0401150305.651de98b@posting.google.c om... reneekarynracine@aol.comhomesafe (Kathy T) wrote in message news:<20040115014522.01395.00000059@mb-m03.aol.com>... >Are you a member of Bastard Nation? If so, tell that to the countless >adoptees who died never knowing where they came from or their true >identities during his reign as King of closed records. I'm afraid my >sympathy lies with them. >He was directly responsible for their misery. > >Di I am a member of BN. While I realize that Pierce was an advocate of closed records, I repeat that he himself is not responsible for closing them in the first place. Of course he wasn't, but he WAS responsible for keeping them closed for 20-25 years longer than the rest of the world. In addition, I doubt any true human being rejoices in the death, especially from a debilitating terminal illness of their adversary. I find that rejoicing in anyones death (except for certain murderers) is beyond inhumane, and quite rude. Kathy, born Renee Karyn Racine Nobody is rejoicing in his death. But to now make him out to be some kind of National hero after his shameful lifelong fight to oppose other people's human rights is absolutely mindboggling. Especially when it comes from the very people whose rights he was opposing, and even worse, who still do not have those rights, because of him. Di I agree with both of you. Closed records were but a part of his legacy. He did accomplish good in other areas of adoption.

What good did he accomplish in other areas of adoption other than to
promote it and consequently lock even more adoptees into the closed
system for a further 20 years? You call that an achievement?

Most people are a complex mix. I don't think it is necessary to focus only on one or the other. I see nothing wrong with acknowledging *both* when someone has passed on. Death does not automatically render one a saint.

I'm sure even Hitler had his good points at one time. He promised and
provided his people with work to feed their families when they were
all starving at the heights of the Great Depression. Which is what
helped him rise to power. But you don't see the Jews singing his
praises because of it.

Di
Kathy 1 Kathy 1

Marley Greiner

01-15-2004, 03:36 PM

"Dian" <patrice68@bigpond.com.au> wrote in message
news:c599139c.0401151532.12e92fdb@posting.google.c om... "kat" <katlat24@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:<bu67o1$duor9$1@ID-203097.news.uni-berlin.de>... "Dian" <patrice68@bigpond.com.au> wrote in message news:c599139c.0401150305.651de98b@posting.google.c om... reneekarynracine@aol.comhomesafe (Kathy T) wrote in message news:<20040115014522.01395.00000059@mb-m03.aol.com>... > >Are you a member of Bastard Nation? If so, tell that to the
countless > >adoptees who died never knowing where they came from or their true > >identities during his reign as King of closed records. I'm afraid
my > >sympathy lies with them. > >He was directly responsible for their misery. > > > >Di > > I am a member of BN. While I realize that Pierce was an advocate of closed > records, I repeat that he himself is not responsible for closing
them in the > first place. Of course he wasn't, but he WAS responsible for keeping them closed for 20-25 years longer than the rest of the world. In addition, I doubt any true human being rejoices in the death, > especially from a debilitating terminal illness of their adversary.
I find > that rejoicing in anyones death (except for certain murderers) is
beyond > inhumane, and quite rude. > Kathy, born Renee Karyn Racine > Nobody is rejoicing in his death. But to now make him out to be some kind of National hero after his shameful lifelong fight to oppose other people's human rights is absolutely mindboggling. Especially when it comes from the very people whose rights he was opposing, and even worse, who still do not have those rights, because of him. Di I agree with both of you. Closed records were but a part of his legacy.
He did accomplish good in other areas of adoption. What good did he accomplish in other areas of adoption other than to promote it and consequently lock even more adoptees into the closed system for a further 20 years? You call that an achievement?

You could start by checking out the crooked agencies, lawyers, and
facilitators he shut down.

Marley

Dian

01-15-2004, 03:38 PM

mhjtw@hotmail.com (Melinda Walmsley) wrote in message news:<eb5515c9.0401150807.325e286d@posting.google.com>... Nobody is rejoicing in his death. But to now make him out to be some kind of National hero after his shameful lifelong fight to oppose other people's human rights is absolutely mindboggling. Especially when it comes from the very people whose rights he was opposing, and even worse, who still do not have those rights, because of him. Di The whole topic reminds me of something the munchkins said in the Wizard of Oz, when the house landed on the wicked witch. But I'm from Kansas, so what can I say. That movie is a part of my heritage.

And I'm sure a lot of people out there are singing it. Unfortunately
there's always another one to take his place.

Di

Kathy

01-15-2004, 03:45 PM

>Subject: Re: Bill Pierce? ConfirmedFrom: patrice68@bigpond.com.au (Dian)Date: 1/15/04 3:32 PM Pacific Standard TimeMessage-id: <c599139c.0401151532.12e92fdb@posting.google.com>

(snip)

Re: Bill Pierce

Di yaps:
What good did he accomplish in other areas of adoption other than topromote it and consequently lock even more adoptees into the closedsystem for a further 20 years? You call that an achievement?
I'm sure even Hitler had his good points at one time. He promised andprovided his people with work to feed their families when they wereall starving at the heights of the Great Depression. Which is whathelped him rise to power. But you don't see the Jews singing hispraises because of it.
Di

How could you even compare Bill Pierce with a mass murderer such as Hitler?

Up your meds time, Di....you are drowning in your own spittle.

Diane Welfare, "she describes the US market as a "$US1.4 billion business in
baby trafficking". ~~121603
http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2003/12/15/1071336884771.html

Jrobnett1

01-15-2004, 04:02 PM

In article <c599139c.0401151532.12e92fdb@posting.google.com>,
patrice68@bigpond.com.au (Dian) writes:
I'm sure even Hitler had his good points at one time. He promised andprovided his people with work to feed their families when they wereall starving at the heights of the Great Depression. Which is whathelped him rise to power. But you don't see the Jews singing hispraises because of it.

You are a pig, Dianne

Jeannette, bmom

Forgiveness does not change the past, but it does enlarge the future.
Paul Boese

The Animal Rescue Site - Feed An Animal In Need
http://www.theanimalrescuesite.com/cgi-bin/WebObjects/CTDSites

Jrobnett1

01-15-2004, 04:02 PM

In article <20040114015924.11235.00002820@mb-m11.aol.com>,
lilmtncbn@aol.comnospam (LilMtnCbn) writes:
Subject: Bill PierceFrom: "Ron Morgan" rhyzome1@earthlink.netDate: 1/13/04 11:49 PM Mountain Standard TimeMessage-id: <LD5Nb.8367$1e.4912@newsread2.news.pas.earthlink.ne t>Bill Pierce was my adversary, not only did he lead the movement againstopening records, he embodied the attitudes and political inertia that keepsthe United States the sole industrialized nation that seals its adoptionrecords to adult adoptees. But he was a worthy adversary.Bill Pierce helped shape the open records movement by the quality andattitude of his opposition to it. He was a consummate professionalpolitician, in all the connotations of the word, and thus he compelled us tobecome better activists, organizers, and politicians. Bill did not sufferfools, at least those who disagreed with him, and so he made us keep ourwits sharpened, especially when we went one on one with him. He was the bestthe sealed records crowd had to offer; no one has attained his stature sincehis retirement.I had the opportunity to get to know Bill personally, not closely, butenough to get a hint of the man. We shared an appreciation for a good joke,a good argument, a good fight. He used to post to alt.adoption, in variousguises, never as himself, until a few of us caught on and started ragging onhim mercilessly. Then, one day shortly thereafter, he appeared asPierceforhimself, and although he never admitted his Walter Mitty-esqueturns pretending to be a congressional aide or an African-Americanphysician, he never complained about the abuse we heaped on him either.Once, at a taping of a TV show on which we both appeared, we spoke aboutlife after the fray, in a future when records were opened to adult adoptees,and he seemed filled with equinimity. After the show was over, as the thememusic came up in the house, Bill started boogying enthusiastically in hischair. I'll hold the smile that evoked as his memory.Ron MorganRon, whenever I think of Bill P, I'll hold the memory of him from your postinmy mind. Thanks.

Ditto- I had forgotten about his "disguises", lol.

Jeannette, bmom

Forgiveness does not change the past, but it does enlarge the future.
Paul Boese

The Animal Rescue Site - Feed An Animal In Need
http://www.theanimalrescuesite.com/cgi-bin/WebObjects/CTDSites

Jrobnett1

01-15-2004, 04:02 PM

In article <309900pnp8mt7k3q1hhh4h0udd6iubqmmh@4ax.com>, nancy <me@privacy.net>
writes:
For some reason, I feel sorta bad about this. I didn'tagree with (almost) anything he said, but I enjoyed hispresence on a.a.

Me too. No matter what, he was one of us- here on alt.adoption, and he loved
our Marley, and I always enjoyed their debates. I will miss him.

Jeannette, bmom

Forgiveness does not change the past, but it does enlarge the future.
Paul Boese

The Animal Rescue Site - Feed An Animal In Need
http://www.theanimalrescuesite.com/cgi-bin/WebObjects/CTDSites

Jrobnett1

01-15-2004, 04:02 PM

In article <VMzNb.10597$1e.4831@newsread2.news.pas.earthlink.n et>, "Ron Morgan"
<rhyzome1@earthlink.net> writes:
I wish I could attend Bill's funeral. I'd love to shmooze with the Senators,Congressmen, Laura Bush, Hillary Clinton, and others who will attend, topersonalize the struggle for open records the way that Bill personalized thestruggle against. I hope that Marley does. Because that's where the actionwill be, not on alt.adoption in some interminable thread on who's got thebiggest and most legitimate wound.

What a wonderful post, Ron.

Jeannette, bmom

Forgiveness does not change the past, but it does enlarge the future.
Paul Boese

The Animal Rescue Site - Feed An Animal In Need
http://www.theanimalrescuesite.com/cgi-bin/WebObjects/CTDSites

Kathy

01-15-2004, 04:22 PM

>Subject: Re: Bill Pierce? ConfirmedFrom: jrobnett1@aol.combustible (Jrobnett1)Date: 1/15/04 4:02 PM Pacific Standard TimeMessage-id: <20040115190240.13960.00000036@mb-m11.aol.com>In article <c599139c.0401151532.12e92fdb@posting.google.com>,patrice68@bigpond.com.au (Dian) writes:I'm sure even Hitler had his good points at one time. He promised andprovided his people with work to feed their families when they wereall starving at the heights of the Great Depression. Which is whathelped him rise to power. But you don't see the Jews singing hispraises because of it.You are a pig, DianneJeannette, bmom

I think the spelling is Dian, or Diane, but all the same, I agree!

Diane Welfare, "she describes the US market as a "$US1.4 billion business in
baby trafficking". ~~121603
http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2003/12/15/1071336884771.html

Ron Morgan

01-15-2004, 04:43 PM

"Dian" <patrice68@bigpond.com.au> wrote in message
news:c599139c.0401151312.37ad9ea3@posting.google.c om... pb... <woodlark-99@newsguy.com> wrote in message
news:<ucad00d47pp4ri10njjfdpr2r9cauihr4a@4ax.com>... On 15 Jan 2004 03:05:49 -0800, patrice68@bigpond.com.au (Dian) writes:

http://www.bastards.org/bq/bq19/Jean_Paton.html http://www.geocities.com/orphanvoyage1953/jean.html ORPHAN VOYAGE MEMORIAL Dedicated to adoptees and birthparents who died before the chance of being reunited with the one they lost to adoption. Lest we forget. Di

Gawd. I'm sick of tragedy pimping...

Ron

Marley Greiner

01-15-2004, 05:00 PM

"Ron Morgan" <rhyzome1@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:FsGNb.12039$zj7.2596@newsread1.news.pas.earth link.net... "Dian" <patrice68@bigpond.com.au> wrote in message news:c599139c.0401151312.37ad9ea3@posting.google.c om... pb... <woodlark-99@newsguy.com> wrote in message news:<ucad00d47pp4ri10njjfdpr2r9cauihr4a@4ax.com>... On 15 Jan 2004 03:05:49 -0800, patrice68@bigpond.com.au (Dian) writes: http://www.bastards.org/bq/bq19/Jean_Paton.html http://www.geocities.com/orphanvoyage1953/jean.html ORPHAN VOYAGE MEMORIAL Dedicated to adoptees and birthparents who died before the chance of being reunited with the one they lost to adoption. Lest we forget. Di Gawd. I'm sick of tragedy pimping... Ron

What would adoption be without it? I should write my own story--how my
bdad was exiled to China for his indiscretion with an older woman and was
forced todrink tea with Madame Chaing kai-chek. It was indeed sad.

Marley

Kathy T

01-15-2004, 07:12 PM

>Subject: Re: Bill Pierce? ConfirmedFrom: jrobnett1@aol.combustible (Jrobnett1)Date: 1/15/04 4:02 PM Pacific Standard TimeMessage-id: <20040115190240.13960.00000036@mb-m11.aol.com>In article <c599139c.0401151532.12e92fdb@posting.google.com>,patrice68@bigpond.com.au (Dian) writes:I'm sure even Hitler had his good points at one time. He promised andprovided his people with work to feed their families when they wereall starving at the heights of the Great Depression. Which is whathelped him rise to power. But you don't see the Jews singing hispraises because of it.You are a pig, Dianne

How succinct! Right on Jeannette!!Jeannette, bmomForgiveness does not change the past, but it does enlarge the future.Paul BoeseThe Animal Rescue Site - Feed An Animal In Needhttp://www.theanimalrescuesite.com/cgi-bin/WebObjects/CTDSites
Kathy, born Renee Karyn Racine

Permanent good can never be the outcome of untruth and violence.
--Mahatma Gandhi
Peace is not merely a distant goal that we seek, but a means by which we arrive
at that goal.
--Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.

Kathy T

01-15-2004, 07:15 PM

>Subject: Re: Bill Pierce? ConfirmedFrom: mhjtw@hotmail.com (Melinda Walmsley)Date: 1/15/04 8:07 AM Pacific Standard TimeMessage-id: <eb5515c9.0401150807.325e286d@posting.google.com> Nobody is rejoicing in his death. But to now make him out to be some kind of National hero after his shameful lifelong fight to oppose other people's human rights is absolutely mindboggling. Especially when it comes from the very people whose rights he was opposing, and even worse, who still do not have those rights, because of him. DiThe whole topic reminds me of something the munchkins said in theWizard of Oz, when the house landed on the wicked witch. But I'mfrom Kansas, so what can I say. That movie is a part of my heritage.
Not to mention the fact that it will be your epitaph when your day comes, no
doubt.
Kathy, born Renee Karyn Racine

Permanent good can never be the outcome of untruth and violence.
--Mahatma Gandhi
Peace is not merely a distant goal that we seek, but a means by which we arrive
at that goal.
--Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.

Kathy T

01-15-2004, 07:17 PM

Top posting <KUDOS>
My remarks weren't intended to lift Pierce to sainthood, or elevate him tonational hero. As if my remarks on alt.adoption could do such a thing.Pierce had been retired from NCFA for years, and his direct influence hadwaned considerably. His avuncular persona on alt.adoption stood in starkcontrast to his take-no-prisoners style as a lobbyist. If you recall thestories circulating in the press back in the presidential campaign of 2000about John McCain's temper, about a uncensored tantrum McCain threw atsomeone in his office, you probably didn't know that Pierce was therecipient. If you deal with politicians on a day to day basis, as I do, youknow how difficult it is to get one to go on tilt. You have to be amasterful button pusher to manipulate a US Senator in such a way as toinfluence his candidacy.I had little respect for his position, but I had, and have, a great respectfor his methodology. I had to, because to ignore his skill was to surrenderthe field.As I mentioned, Pierce had been retired for years, yet we're no closer toachieving open records than we were when he was ED of NCFA. This has muchless to do with Pierce than it does a failure in leadership in the movementto open records. Instead of growing our base of support using the timehonored methods of community organizing or the newer Howard Dean stylefundraising and base growing opportunies of the internet , we spend ourenergies fighting over which point of the triad is the most victimized, orconversely, denigrating those with a legitimate grievance for the harm thatadoption has caused them. We coset ourselves into self-selected supportgroup ghettoes, while the bulk of the population, the emillions we need tosway if we want a political solution, assumes we can access our recordswhenever we feel like it. We, in adoption world, have formed a giantdysfunctional "healing" circle, facing inward, and we talk on and on withourselves. Bill made us face outwards, to the world, and that was what myremarks were intended to address.I wish I could attend Bill's funeral. I'd love to shmooze with the Senators,Congressmen, Laura Bush, Hillary Clinton, and others who will attend, topersonalize the struggle for open records the way that Bill personalized thestruggle against. I hope that Marley does. Because that's where the actionwill be, not on alt.adoption in some interminable thread on who's got thebiggest and most legitimate wound.RonProud Bastard Permanent good can never be the outcome of untruth and violence. --Mahatma Gandhi Peace is not merely a distant goal that we seek, but a means by which wearrive at that goal. --Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.

Kathy, born Renee Karyn Racine

Permanent good can never be the outcome of untruth and violence.
--Mahatma Gandhi
Peace is not merely a distant goal that we seek, but a means by which we arrive
at that goal.
--Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.

pb...

01-15-2004, 07:26 PM

On 15 Jan 2004 13:12:44 -0800, patrice68@bigpond.com.au (Dian) writes:
pb... <woodlark-99@newsguy.com> wrote in message news:<ucad00d47pp4ri10njjfdpr2r9cauihr4a@4ax.com>... On 15 Jan 2004 03:05:49 -0800, patrice68@bigpond.com.au (Dian) writes:reneekarynracine@aol.comhomesafe (Kathy T) wrote in message news:<20040115014522.01395.00000059@mb-m03.aol.com>...> >Are you a member of Bastard Nation? If so, tell that to the> >countless adoptees who died never knowing where they came> >from or their true identities during his reign as King of closed> >records. I'm afraid my sympathy lies with them. He was directly> >responsible for their misery.> >> >Di>> I am a member of BN. While I realize that Pierce was an advocate> of closed records, I repeat that he himself is not responsible for> closing them in the first place.Of course he wasn't, but he WAS responsible for keeping them closedfor 20-25 years longer than the rest of the world. In addition, I doubt any true human being rejoices in the death,> especially from a debilitating terminal illness of their adversary.> I find that rejoicing in anyones death (except for certain murderers)> is beyond inhumane, and quite rude.> Kathy, born Renee Karyn Racine>Nobody is rejoicing in his death. But to now make him out to be somekind of National hero after his shameful lifelong fight to opposeother people's human rights is absolutely mindboggling. Especiallywhen it comes from the very people whose rights he was opposing,and even worse, who still do not have those rights, because of him.Di Very well said, Di. Right on the mark. pb...Jean Paton will be weeping in her grave. What a betrayal.http://www.bastards.org/bq/bq19/Jean_Paton.htmlhttp://www.geocities.com/orphanvoyage1953/jean.htmlORPHAN VOYAGE MEMORIALDedicated to adoptees and birthparents who died before the chance ofbeing reunited with the one they lost to adoption.Lest we forget.Di

We shan't forget, Di. Many thousands of us *do* remember and pass the
torch whenever we're able. My heart quite literally swells when I think
of Jean...what a pioneer - trailblazer - she was in the fight for rights of
equality for all. I'll take this opportunity to add Dirck Brown's name to
this as he should always be remembered for his works and devoted spirit
- to all involved in adoption, and to the children most especially. With
an added thought of Jean, now surrounded by her entire earth family...
and smiling, not weeping, Di. Please send my very best to Joss!

pb...

"The state has, in order to control us, introduced division into
our thinking, so that we come to distrust others and look to
the state for protection! But the roots of our individualism
remind us that what we are is inseparable from the source
from which all others derive; that coercive practices that
threaten our neighbor also threaten us."
--Butler Shaffer

Dian

01-15-2004, 10:16 PM

pb... <woodlark-99@newsguy.com> wrote in message news:<7tle00tteh890fnjsutru74kbf87enig1b@4ax.com>... On 15 Jan 2004 13:12:44 -0800, patrice68@bigpond.com.au (Dian) writes:pb... <woodlark-99@newsguy.com> wrote in message news:<ucad00d47pp4ri10njjfdpr2r9cauihr4a@4ax.com>... On 15 Jan 2004 03:05:49 -0800, patrice68@bigpond.com.au (Dian) writes: >reneekarynracine@aol.comhomesafe (Kathy T) wrote in message news: ><20040115014522.01395.00000059@mb-m03.aol.com>... >> >Are you a member of Bastard Nation? If so, tell that to the >> >countless adoptees who died never knowing where they came >> >from or their true identities during his reign as King of closed >> >records. I'm afraid my sympathy lies with them. He was directly >> >responsible for their misery. >> > >> >Di >> >> I am a member of BN. While I realize that Pierce was an advocate >> of closed records, I repeat that he himself is not responsible for >> closing them in the first place. > >Of course he wasn't, but he WAS responsible for keeping them closed >for 20-25 years longer than the rest of the world. > > > In addition, I doubt any true human being rejoices in the death, >> especially from a debilitating terminal illness of their adversary. >> I find that rejoicing in anyones death (except for certain murderers) >> is beyond inhumane, and quite rude. >> Kathy, born Renee Karyn Racine >> > >Nobody is rejoicing in his death. But to now make him out to be some >kind of National hero after his shameful lifelong fight to oppose >other people's human rights is absolutely mindboggling. Especially >when it comes from the very people whose rights he was opposing, >and even worse, who still do not have those rights, because of him. > >Di Very well said, Di. Right on the mark. pb...Jean Paton will be weeping in her grave. What a betrayal.http://www.bastards.org/bq/bq19/Jean_Paton.htmlhttp://www.geocities.com/orphanvoyage1953/jean.htmlORPHAN VOYAGE MEMORIALDedicated to adoptees and birthparents who died before the chance ofbeing reunited with the one they lost to adoption.Lest we forget.Di We shan't forget, Di. Many thousands of us *do* remember and pass the torch whenever we're able. My heart quite literally swells when I think of Jean...what a pioneer - trailblazer - she was in the fight for rights of equality for all. I'll take this opportunity to add Dirck Brown's name to this as he should always be remembered for his works and devoted spirit - to all involved in adoption, and to the children most especially. With an added thought of Jean, now surrounded by her entire earth family... and smiling, not weeping, Di. Please send my very best to Joss! pb... "The state has, in order to control us, introduced division into our thinking, so that we come to distrust others and look to the state for protection! But the roots of our individualism remind us that what we are is inseparable from the source from which all others derive; that coercive practices that threaten our neighbor also threaten us." --Butler Shaffer

Thank you for restoring my faith, PB. I hadn't heard of Dirke Brown's
involvement so thank you for bringing him to my attention and for
making me smile when thinking of Jean. They shall be remembered. And I
will certainly pass you wishes on to Joss.

Di

Steve White

01-15-2004, 10:38 PM

In article <20040114164206.29591.00002566@mb-m02.aol.com>,
reneekarynracine@aol.comhomesafe (Kathy T) wrote:

While I might not agree with his position on most adoption issues, I do believe he encouraged adoption because he felt it was the best thing for the children. Whether or not that was actually the case, it's hard not to respect someone who has such high regard for children. The man was a gentleman.

Agreed. He was a gentleman and he fought by the rules. I didn't buy much
of what he said but I respect him a whole lot more than some others in
the adoption debate.

steve

Dian

01-16-2004, 06:00 AM

Steve White <steve@spam.me.never> wrote in message news:<steve-DE816C.00384516012004@netnews.comcast.net>... In article <20040114164206.29591.00002566@mb-m02.aol.com>, reneekarynracine@aol.comhomesafe (Kathy T) wrote: While I might not agree with his position on most adoption issues, I do believe he encouraged adoption because he felt it was the best thing for the children. Whether or not that was actually the case, it's hard not to respect someone who has such high regard for children. The man was a gentleman. Agreed. He was a gentleman and he fought by the rules.

He did indeed. Like all shrewd politicians he declawed his opponents by
befriending them. Then played them like a fiddle. And won.

Di

I didn't buy much of what he said but I respect him a whole lot more than some others in the adoption debate.
steve

Marley Greiner

01-16-2004, 07:19 AM

"Dian" <patrice68@bigpond.com.au> wrote in message
news:c599139c.0401160600.179b025f@posting.google.c om... Steve White <steve@spam.me.never> wrote in message
news:<steve-DE816C.00384516012004@netnews.comcast.net>... In article <20040114164206.29591.00002566@mb-m02.aol.com>, reneekarynracine@aol.comhomesafe (Kathy T) wrote: While I might not agree with his position on most adoption issues, I do believe he encouraged adoption because he felt it was the best thing for the children. Whether or not that was actually the case, it's hard not to respect someone who has such high regard for children. The man was a gentleman. Agreed. He was a gentleman and he fought by the rules. He did indeed. Like all shrewd politicians he declawed his opponents by befriending them. Then played them like a fiddle. And won. Di

Hardly.

Marley I didn't buy much of what he said but I respect him a whole lot more than some others in the adoption debate. steve

Chosenchildinc1

01-16-2004, 07:52 AM

>Subject: Re: Bill Pierce? ConfirmedFrom: "Marley Greiner" maddogmarley@worldnet.att.netDate: 1/16/2004 11:49 AM Newfoundland Standard TimeMessage-id: <8iTNb.48412$6y6.997221@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net>"Dian" <patrice68@bigpond.com.au> wrote in messagenews:c599139c.0401160600.179b025f@posting.g oogle.com... Steve White <steve@spam.me.never> wrote in messagenews:<steve-DE816C.00384516012004@netnews.comcast.net>... In article <20040114164206.29591.00002566@mb-m02.aol.com>, reneekarynracine@aol.comhomesafe (Kathy T) wrote: > While I might not agree with his position on most adoption issues, I > do believe he encouraged adoption because he felt it was the best > thing for the children. Whether or not that was actually the case, > it's hard not to respect someone who has such high regard for > children. The man was a gentleman. Agreed. He was a gentleman and he fought by the rules. He did indeed. Like all shrewd politicians he declawed his opponents by befriending them. Then played them like a fiddle. And won. DiHardly.Marley I didn't buy much of what he said but I respect him a whole lot more than some others in the adoption debate. steve

Please Di, I never saw Bill as being sinister, I did see him as being a tough
old guy who believed what he believed, never did I see him as "playing" Marley
to "win". Anyone who has followed Marley knows that she is about as "Winnable"
as Karl Marx. If Marley smelled she was being played, she would have told him
to stick it on day one. Is everyone in Di's world a sinister user with
malintent? What a lousy world that must be. I think he honestly beleived he was
doing his best for children, right or wrong, it was a product of his
generation.

Chosenchildinc1

01-16-2004, 08:03 AM

>Subject: Re: Bill Pierce? ConfirmedFrom: chosenchildinc1@aol.com (Chosenchildinc1)Date: 1/16/2004 12:22 PM Newfoundland Standard TimeMessage-id: <20040116105235.11652.00000040@mb-m12.aol.com>Subject: Re: Bill Pierce? ConfirmedFrom: "Marley Greiner" maddogmarley@worldnet.att.netDate: 1/16/2004 11:49 AM Newfoundland Standard TimeMessage-id: <8iTNb.48412$6y6.997221@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net>"Dian" <patrice68@bigpond.com.au> wrote in messagenews:c599139c.0401160600.179b025f@posting.g oogle.com... Steve White <steve@spam.me.never> wrote in messagenews:<steve-DE816C.00384516012004@netnews.comcast.net>... > In article <20040114164206.29591.00002566@mb-m02.aol.com>, > reneekarynracine@aol.comhomesafe (Kathy T) wrote: > > > > While I might not agree with his position on most adoption issues, I > > do believe he encouraged adoption because he felt it was the best > > thing for the children. Whether or not that was actually the case, > > it's hard not to respect someone who has such high regard for > > children. The man was a gentleman. > > > Agreed. He was a gentleman and he fought by the rules. He did indeed. Like all shrewd politicians he declawed his opponents by befriending them. Then played them like a fiddle. And won. DiHardly.Marley I didn't buy much > of what he said but I respect him a whole lot more than some others in > the adoption debate. > > > > stevePlease Di, I never saw Bill as being sinister, I did see him as being a toughold guy who believed what he believed, never did I see him as "playing"Marleyto "win". Anyone who has followed Marley knows that she is about as"Winnable"as Karl Marx. If Marley smelled she was being played, she would have told himto stick it on day one. Is everyone in Di's world a sinister user withmalintent? What a lousy world that must be. I think he honestly beleived hewasdoing his best for children, right or wrong, it was a product of hisgeneration.

After reading the above, and typing fast, while on the phone, I want to say
that i really do know the difference between believe and beleive, too, two, and
to, and their, there, and they're.

Thank you, it even offended my eyes when I re-read it.

Mea Culpa

helicon

01-16-2004, 10:46 AM

"Dian" <patrice68@bigpond.com.au> wrote in message
news:c599139c.0401160600.179b025f@posting.google.c om... Steve White <steve@spam.me.never> wrote in message
news:<steve-DE816C.00384516012004@netnews.comcast.net>... In article <20040114164206.29591.00002566@mb-m02.aol.com>, reneekarynracine@aol.comhomesafe (Kathy T) wrote: While I might not agree with his position on most adoption issues, I do believe he encouraged adoption because he felt it was the best thing for the children. Whether or not that was actually the case, it's hard not to respect someone who has such high regard for children. The man was a gentleman. Agreed. He was a gentleman and he fought by the rules. He did indeed. Like all shrewd politicians he declawed his opponents by befriending them. Then played them like a fiddle. And won.

That's not true. IMHO

Helen
Di I didn't buy much of what he said but I respect him a whole lot more than some others in the adoption debate. steve

Dian

01-16-2004, 12:25 PM

chosenchildinc1@aol.com (Chosenchildinc1) wrote in message news:<20040116105235.11652.00000040@mb-m12.aol.com>...Subject: Re: Bill Pierce? ConfirmedFrom: "Marley Greiner" maddogmarley@worldnet.att.netDate: 1/16/2004 11:49 AM Newfoundland Standard TimeMessage-id: <8iTNb.48412$6y6.997221@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net>"Dian" <patrice68@bigpond.com.au> wrote in messagenews:c599139c.0401160600.179b025f@posting.g oogle.com... Steve White <steve@spam.me.never> wrote in message news:<steve-DE816C.00384516012004@netnews.comcast.net>... > In article <20040114164206.29591.00002566@mb-m02.aol.com>, > reneekarynracine@aol.comhomesafe (Kathy T) wrote: > > > > While I might not agree with his position on most adoption issues, I > > do believe he encouraged adoption because he felt it was the best > > thing for the children. Whether or not that was actually the case, > > it's hard not to respect someone who has such high regard for > > children. The man was a gentleman. > > > Agreed. He was a gentleman and he fought by the rules. He did indeed. Like all shrewd politicians he declawed his opponents by befriending them. Then played them like a fiddle. And won. DiHardly.Marley I didn't buy much > of what he said but I respect him a whole lot more than some others in > the adoption debate. > > > > steve Please Di, I never saw Bill as being sinister, I did see him as being a tough old guy who believed what he believed, never did I see him as "playing" Marley to "win". Anyone who has followed Marley knows that she is about as "Winnable" as Karl Marx.

Marley's fight is with the legislators, not Bill. And it would have
been had he not decided that adopted people were not entitled to the
same rights as afforded everyone else, including himself. Their rights
were none of his
business. He was your oppressor, not the legislators.

If Marley smelled she was being played, she would have told him to stick it on day one. Is everyone in Di's world a sinister user with malintent? What a lousy world that must be. I think he honestly beleived he was doing his best for children, right or wrong, it was a product of his generation.

It is not about being sinister. It's clever politics. I don't mean to
be mean about this but what I am upset about is how almost everyone
except PB has
declared how Bill had every right to his own opinion. Well I'm sorry
but he
did not. He had no Goddamn right to foist his own personal opinion on
millions of adopted people when that opinion affects their own human
rights.

Are you now all saying he had a right to oppress you because his "own
views differed to that of your own?"

The call for open records is a pleasant debate between two parties of
equal status. It's one side holding their opponents hostage by denying
them their own human rights. Well call me strange, but AFAIK another
person's human rights are not up for debate. End of discussion. Bill
had no right to hold you all hostage to his feed his own agenda, but
that exactly what he did. For 20 years.

And I'm sorry to say he did win. You still don't have open records in
all but five States. Thanks to Bill.

Di

Ron Morgan

01-16-2004, 03:42 PM

Dian wrote:
chosenchildinc1@aol.com (Chosenchildinc1) wrote in message news:<20040116105235.11652.00000040@mb-m12.aol.com>...Subject: Re: Bill Pierce? ConfirmedFrom: "Marley Greiner" maddogmarley@worldnet.att.netDate: 1/16/2004 11:49 AM Newfoundland Standard TimeMessage-id: <8iTNb.48412$6y6.997221@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net>"Dian" <patrice68@bigpond.com.au> wrote in messagenews:c599139c.0401160600.179b025f@posting.g oogle.com...> Steve White <steve@spam.me.never> wrote in message news:<steve-DE816C.00384516012004@netnews.comcast.net>...> > In article <20040114164206.29591.00002566@mb-m02.aol.com>,> > reneekarynracine@aol.comhomesafe (Kathy T) wrote:> >> >> > > While I might not agree with his position on most adoption issues, I> > > do believe he encouraged adoption because he felt it was the best> > > thing for the children. Whether or not that was actually the case,> > > it's hard not to respect someone who has such high regard for> > > children. The man was a gentleman.> >> >> > Agreed. He was a gentleman and he fought by the rules.>> He did indeed. Like all shrewd politicians he declawed his opponents by> befriending them. Then played them like a fiddle. And won.>>> DiHardly.Marley>>>>> I didn't buy much> > of what he said but I respect him a whole lot more than some others in> > the adoption debate.> >> >> >> > steve Please Di, I never saw Bill as being sinister, I did see him as being a tough old guy who believed what he believed, never did I see him as "playing" Marley to "win". Anyone who has followed Marley knows that she is about as "Winnable" as Karl Marx. Marley's fight is with the legislators, not Bill. And it would have been had he not decided that adopted people were not entitled to the same rights as afforded everyone else, including himself. Their rights were none of his business. He was your oppressor, not the legislators.

Pierce's power extended only to convincing legislators to preserve a state run system that denies us our rights. Ultimately, the state oppresses us.
There was only one of him, and millions of us. If we had the organizational abilities of medium sized PTA, this would be moot; legislators would vote for
open records or get voted out of office. Instead, we blame Pierce for our own inability to protect our own rights. We act like a bunch of simps and then
whine when we get treated like simps. Basta!
If Marley smelled she was being played, she would have told him to stick it on day one. Is everyone in Di's world a sinister user with malintent? What a lousy world that must be. I think he honestly beleived he was doing his best for children, right or wrong, it was a product of his generation. It is not about being sinister. It's clever politics. I don't mean to be mean about this but what I am upset about is how almost everyone except PB has declared how Bill had every right to his own opinion. Well I'm sorry but he did not. He had no Goddamn right to foist his own personal opinion on millions of adopted people when that opinion affects their own human rights.

He was able to foist his opinion on us because we let him.
Are you now all saying he had a right to oppress you because his "own views differed to that of your own?" The call for open records is a pleasant debate between two parties of equal status.

I'm assuming you meant to write that it's not a pleasant debate between two parties of equal status.

It's one side holding their opponents hostage by denying them their own human rights. Well call me strange, but AFAIK another person's human rights are not up for debate. End of discussion. Bill had no right to hold you all hostage to his feed his own agenda, but that exactly what he did. For 20 years. And I'm sorry to say he did win. You still don't have open records in all but five States. Thanks to Bill.

Yeah, yeah, Bill, Bill, Bill, boo hoo hoo. Look, the sealed records system wouldn't last five minutes if adoptees wised up and shook off their apathy and
victimhood, and started acting like they want open records instead of wistfully wishing they'd drop out of the sky, and sitting around crying about the
bully who oppresses them.

I have no illusions about Bill Pierce, he lied, he catered to fear and the worst aspects of human nature, he bullied, he was, in the words of Damsel
Plum, an animal. In other words, he was a professional politician. I could waste a lot of energy units propping him up as the bogeyman, but he's been
politically irrelevant for years, and now he's dead. I guess I could keep blaming him for sealed records, but that's not what's going to get them opened.

Ron
Di

Marley Greiner

01-16-2004, 04:39 PM

"Ron Morgan" <rhyzome1@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:4008B8B8.F1148FBD@earthlink.net... Dian wrote: chosenchildinc1@aol.com (Chosenchildinc1) wrote in message
news:<20040116105235.11652.00000040@mb-m12.aol.com>... >Subject: Re: Bill Pierce? Confirmed >From: "Marley Greiner" maddogmarley@worldnet.att.net >Date: 1/16/2004 11:49 AM Newfoundland Standard Time >Message-id:
<8iTNb.48412$6y6.997221@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net> > > >"Dian" <patrice68@bigpond.com.au> wrote in message >news:c599139c.0401160600.179b025f@posting.google.c om... >> Steve White <steve@spam.me.never> wrote in message news:<steve-DE816C.00384516012004@netnews.comcast.net>... >> > In article <20040114164206.29591.00002566@mb-m02.aol.com>, >> > reneekarynracine@aol.comhomesafe (Kathy T) wrote: >> > >> > >> > > While I might not agree with his position on most adoption
issues, I >> > > do believe he encouraged adoption because he felt it was the
best >> > > thing for the children. Whether or not that was actually the
case, >> > > it's hard not to respect someone who has such high regard for >> > > children. The man was a gentleman. >> > >> > >> > Agreed. He was a gentleman and he fought by the rules. >> >> He did indeed. Like all shrewd politicians he declawed his
opponents by >> befriending them. Then played them like a fiddle. And won. >> >> >> Di > >Hardly. > >Marley >> >> >> >> >> I didn't buy much >> > of what he said but I respect him a whole lot more than some
others in >> > the adoption debate. >> > >> > >> > >> > steve > > > > > > > > Please Di, I never saw Bill as being sinister, I did see him as being
a tough old guy who believed what he believed, never did I see him as
"playing" Marley to "win". Anyone who has followed Marley knows that she is about as
"Winnable" as Karl Marx. Marley's fight is with the legislators, not Bill. And it would have been had he not decided that adopted people were not entitled to the same rights as afforded everyone else, including himself. Their rights were none of his business. He was your oppressor, not the legislators. Pierce's power extended only to convincing legislators to preserve a state
run system that denies us our rights. Ultimately, the state oppresses us. There was only one of him, and millions of us. If we had the
organizational abilities of medium sized PTA, this would be moot;
legislators would vote for open records or get voted out of office. Instead, we blame Pierce for our
own inability to protect our own rights. We act like a bunch of simps and
then whine when we get treated like simps. Basta!

Just look at the idiocy over here. Week after week after week of who's on
first. If Marley smelled she was being played, she would have told him to stick it on day one. Is everyone in Di's world a sinister user
with malintent? What a lousy world that must be. I think he honestly
beleived he was doing his best for children, right or wrong, it was a
product of his generation. It is not about being sinister. It's clever politics. I don't mean to be mean about this but what I am upset about is how almost everyone except PB has declared how Bill had every right to his own opinion. Well I'm sorry but he did not. He had no Goddamn right to foist his own personal opinion on millions of adopted people when that opinion affects their own human rights. He was able to foist his opinion on us because we let him.

And let's not forget the mantra of "I don't want to dirty my hands with
pollitis. I just want my records." and the absolute refusal of individuals
and deform organizations in general to hold a line. Gives crumb-bum a whol
new meaning. Are you now all saying he had a right to oppress you because his "own views differed to that of your own?" The call for open records is a pleasant debate between two parties of equal status. I'm assuming you meant to write that it's not a pleasant debate between
two parties of equal status. It's one side holding their opponents hostage by denying them their own human rights. Well call me strange, but AFAIK another person's human rights are not up for debate. End of discussion. Bill had no right to hold you all hostage to his feed his own agenda, but that exactly what he did. For 20 years. And I'm sorry to say he did win. You still don't have open records in all but five States. Thanks to Bill. Yeah, yeah, Bill, Bill, Bill, boo hoo hoo. Look, the sealed records system
wouldn't last five minutes if adoptees wised up and shook off their apathy
and victimhood, and started acting like they want open records instead of
wistfully wishing they'd drop out of the sky, and sitting around crying
about the bully who oppresses them. I have no illusions about Bill Pierce, he lied, he catered to fear and the
worst aspects of human nature, he bullied, he was, in the words of Damsel Plum, an animal. In other words, he was a professional politician. I could
waste a lot of energy units propping him up as the bogeyman, but he's been politically irrelevant for years, and now he's dead. I guess I could keep
blaming him for sealed records, but that's not what's going to get them
opened. Ron

There's an amazing amount of crap going on out on namby-pamby adoption lists
about a new day dawning in open records Well, the new day's been here for
several years now. You can't go around personalizing injustice either by
internalizing your own "victimhood" (barf!) or demonizing a person. It's
systems not high-profile individuals that need confronted. Of course, it's
easier to lay the blame on someone other than to address the real issue of
systemic rot and the possibility (gasp!) that adoption itself is the
monster.

Blame Bill/NCFA other collateral organizations (and there's lots of them) of
you want. They may articulate the arguments, but they are only a symptom of
a deeper malaise. Hang around any legislature and see who the real
opposition is to open records. It's other interests that use adoption as a
weapon to meet its' own agenda. Adoption isn't a blip on the radar unless
it's connected to some other "big" issue.

Marley Di

fiend

01-16-2004, 05:36 PM

In article <c599139c.0401161225.1ab15a89@posting.google.com>,
patrice68@bigpond.com.au (Dian) wrote:
Are you now all saying he had a right to oppress you because his "ownviews differed to that of your own?"

Though I can't speak for others, I myself am saying no such thing. I'm saying
that if someone oppresses you, it's more important to fight him than to hate
him.
End of discussion.

LOL.
And I'm sorry to say he did win. You still don't have open records inall but five States. Thanks to Bill.

So the struggle is over and we should all go home?

whoever
----------------------------
never say Sanka

Dian

01-16-2004, 10:42 PM

"helicon" <helicon@eircom.net> wrote in message news:<ecWNb.5675$HR.11677@news.indigo.ie>... "Dian" <patrice68@bigpond.com.au> wrote in message news:c599139c.0401160600.179b025f@posting.google.c om... Steve White <steve@spam.me.never> wrote in message news:<steve-DE816C.00384516012004@netnews.comcast.net>... In article <20040114164206.29591.00002566@mb-m02.aol.com>, reneekarynracine@aol.comhomesafe (Kathy T) wrote: > While I might not agree with his position on most adoption issues, I > do believe he encouraged adoption because he felt it was the best > thing for the children. Whether or not that was actually the case, > it's hard not to respect someone who has such high regard for > children. The man was a gentleman. Agreed. He was a gentleman and he fought by the rules. He did indeed. Like all shrewd politicians he declawed his opponents by befriending them. Then played them like a fiddle. And won. That's not true. IMHO Helen
He's been opposing the rights of US adoptees for over 20 years. They
are still fighting for them. Need I say more?

Di

Di

Di I didn't buy much of what he said but I respect him a whole lot more than some others in the adoption debate. steve

Dian

01-16-2004, 11:01 PM

reveohw@aol.compromise (fiend) wrote in message news:<20040116203634.01692.00000032@mb-m18.aol.com>... In article <c599139c.0401161225.1ab15a89@posting.google.com>, patrice68@bigpond.com.au (Dian) wrote:Are you now all saying he had a right to oppress you because his "ownviews differed to that of your own?" Though I can't speak for others, I myself am saying no such thing. I'm saying that if someone oppresses you, it's more important to fight him than to hate him.
When you fight someone you do not sing the praises of your oppressor
and honour them for their oppositional opinions when those opinions
were what held you hostage in the first place.
End of discussion. LOL.

As I said, another person's human rights should never be up for
debate.
And I'm sorry to say he did win. You still don't have open records inall but five States. Thanks to Bill. So the struggle is over and we should all go home?

That's not what I said. But it was thanks to Bill you didn't get
records open when the rest of the world did 15-20+ years ago. And
thanks to Bill setting up the NCFA which is diametrically opposed to
the rights of adoptees, you still have a long road in front of you. He
did you no favours. None. He was your oppressor, not your friend.

Di
whoever ---------------------------- never say Sanka

Dian

01-16-2004, 11:37 PM

Ron Morgan <rhyzome1@earthlink.net> wrote in message news:<4008B8B8.F1148FBD@earthlink.net>... Dian wrote: chosenchildinc1@aol.com (Chosenchildinc1) wrote in message news:<20040116105235.11652.00000040@mb-m12.aol.com>... >Subject: Re: Bill Pierce? Confirmed >From: "Marley Greiner" maddogmarley@worldnet.att.net >Date: 1/16/2004 11:49 AM Newfoundland Standard Time >Message-id: <8iTNb.48412$6y6.997221@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net> > > >"Dian" <patrice68@bigpond.com.au> wrote in message >news:c599139c.0401160600.179b025f@posting.google.c om... >> Steve White <steve@spam.me.never> wrote in message news:<steve-DE816C.00384516012004@netnews.comcast.net>... >> > In article <20040114164206.29591.00002566@mb-m02.aol.com>, >> > reneekarynracine@aol.comhomesafe (Kathy T) wrote: >> > >> > >> > > While I might not agree with his position on most adoption issues, I >> > > do believe he encouraged adoption because he felt it was the best >> > > thing for the children. Whether or not that was actually the case, >> > > it's hard not to respect someone who has such high regard for >> > > children. The man was a gentleman. >> > >> > >> > Agreed. He was a gentleman and he fought by the rules. >> >> He did indeed. Like all shrewd politicians he declawed his opponents by >> befriending them. Then played them like a fiddle. And won. >> >> >> Di > >Hardly. > >Marley >> >> >> >> >> I didn't buy much >> > of what he said but I respect him a whole lot more than some others in >> > the adoption debate. >> > >> > >> > >> > steve > > > > > > > > Please Di, I never saw Bill as being sinister, I did see him as being a tough old guy who believed what he believed, never did I see him as "playing" Marley to "win". Anyone who has followed Marley knows that she is about as "Winnable" as Karl Marx. Marley's fight is with the legislators, not Bill. And it would have been had he not decided that adopted people were not entitled to the same rights as afforded everyone else, including himself. Their rights were none of his business. He was your oppressor, not the legislators. Pierce's power extended only to convincing legislators to preserve a state run system that denies us our rights.

And you see that as his ONLY power, Ron? That is ALL the power he
required to keep you down.

Ultimately, the state oppresses us.

The State would not have oppressed you if your argument was solely
between you and them. Bill thought he knew better than you and the
State took his side.

The State also took the adoption profession's side when it asked them
their opinion on whether records should be opened or not, back in
1979. It said NO you should not be given your rights, that the
institute of adoption needed to be protected over your right to your
human rights. Instead of asking the consumers themselves (which is
what other countries did in their lead up to adoption reform) the US
State asked the fox who ran the hen house, for their opinion. And Bill
took it from there.

There was only one of him, and millions of us.

And he won (thus far) because he vehemently opposed your rights.
Without his interference they would have been yours 20 years ago.

If we had the organizational abilities of medium sized PTA, this would
be moot; legislators would vote for open records or get voted out of office. Instead, we blame Pierce for our own inability to protect our own rights.

You didn't have rights to protect. You were fighting to obtain them.
Bill stood in your way. His power with the State lay in the fact that
by his vehement new
promotion of infant adoption in the early 80's (when it was all but
over) he was saving them billions in supporting benefits to single
women. The State gave him what he wanted because he was protecting the
interests of adoption by protecting the interests of adoptive families
who did not want records opened.
He was a friend of the State.

We act like a bunch of simps and then whine when we get treated like simps. Basta! If Marley smelled she was being played, she would have told him to stick it on day one. Is everyone in Di's world a sinister user with malintent? What a lousy world that must be. I think he honestly beleived he was doing his best for children, right or wrong, it was a product of his generation. It is not about being sinister. It's clever politics. I don't mean to be mean about this but what I am upset about is how almost everyone except PB has declared how Bill had every right to his own opinion. Well I'm sorry but he did not. He had no Goddamn right to foist his own personal opinion on millions of adopted people when that opinion affects their own human rights. He was able to foist his opinion on us because we let him.
You allowed him to believe he had a right to his opinion and had a
right to oppose you. He didn't.

Are you now all saying he had a right to oppress you because his "own views differed to that of your own?" The call for open records is a pleasant debate between two parties of equal status. I'm assuming you meant to write that it's not a pleasant debate between two parties of equal status.
I did. Thanks. It's one side holding their opponents hostage by denying them their own human rights. Well call me strange, but AFAIK another person's human rights are not up for debate. End of discussion. Bill had no right to hold you all hostage to his feed his own agenda, but that exactly what he did. For 20 years. And I'm sorry to say he did win. You still don't have open records in all but five States. Thanks to Bill. Yeah, yeah, Bill, Bill, Bill, boo hoo hoo. Look, the sealed records system wouldn't last five minutes if adoptees wised up and shook off their apathy and victimhood, and started acting like they want open records instead of wistfully wishing they'd drop out of the sky, and sitting around crying about the bully who oppresses them.

I'm sorry, Ron, but that's not the way it works. You are blaming the
oppressed
instead of the oppressor. It was Bill who stood in your way. Not those
being oppressed. Had he not interferred there would have been no real
opposition for you to fight. I have no illusions about Bill Pierce, he lied, he catered to fear and the worst aspects of human nature, he bullied, he was, in the words of Damsel Plum, an animal. In other words, he was a professional politician. I could waste a lot of energy units propping him up as the bogeyman, but he's been politically irrelevant for years, and now he's dead. I guess I could keep blaming him for sealed records, but that's not what's going to get them opened.

No he has not been irrelevent for years. His part in your oppression
was merely overtaken by the successor to his throne. His legacy lives
on.

Di

Ron Di

pb...

01-17-2004, 05:39 AM

On Sat, 17 Jan 2004 11:57:59 GMT, Ron Morgan <rhyzome1@earthlink.net> writes:
The state responds to power. Pierce, as an industrial lobbyist, had moneypower, adoptees have people power but thus far haven't figured out howto sustain and grow it.

Exactly. It's not all that unusual that the ones with people power have
yet to discover it's right there under the skin -- kind of like Dorothy
who'd always *had* the power (ruby slippers) to get home to Kansas.

Pierce had a JOB to do...he was hired, paid an excellent salary w/benefits,
and was well briefed in what he was expected to accomplish in his position
as an "industrial lobbyist" -- OTOH, people power folks must first learn
that they aren't alone in their needs...it takes longer for some than others,
before they climb up on that big band wagon and start making noise.

There's a damned good reason why the old saw, "Money talks, bull****
walks" has been around for so long -- I wouldn't doubt that every
culture on this earth has a saying/proverb/whatever that says, in so
many words, "Them what has gets more."

I'll always remember that old joker himself, Bill Pierce, who happily
told a crowd of adoption activists, "If you'd have paid me more than
NCFA, I'd have gladly worked for open records on your side."

pb...

"OR was the best little victory $150,000 could buy."
--Bill Pierce, Ph.D., on the success of Measure 58 in Oregon

Jackie

01-17-2004, 06:17 AM

On Fri, 16 Jan 2004 18:46:59 -0000, "helicon" <helicon@eircom.net>
wrote:

Di wrote.. He did indeed. Like all shrewd politicians he declawed his opponents by befriending them. Then played them like a fiddle. And won.That's not true. IMHO

He befriended me.. Wrote to me private..

I tried to discuss opening up adoption and he cut me off cold..

Jackie

Ron Morgan

01-17-2004, 09:47 AM

"pb..." wrote:
On Sat, 17 Jan 2004 11:57:59 GMT, Ron Morgan <rhyzome1@earthlink.net> writes:The state responds to power. Pierce, as an industrial lobbyist, had moneypower, adoptees have people power but thus far haven't figured out howto sustain and grow it. Exactly. It's not all that unusual that the ones with people power have yet to discover it's right there under the skin -- kind of like Dorothy who'd always *had* the power (ruby slippers) to get home to Kansas. Pierce had a JOB to do...he was hired, paid an excellent salary w/benefits, and was well briefed in what he was expected to accomplish in his position as an "industrial lobbyist" -- OTOH, people power folks must first learn that they aren't alone in their needs...it takes longer for some than others, before they climb up on that big band wagon and start making noise. There's a damned good reason why the old saw, "Money talks, bull**** walks" has been around for so long -- I wouldn't doubt that every culture on this earth has a saying/proverb/whatever that says, in so many words, "Them what has gets more." I'll always remember that old joker himself, Bill Pierce, who happily told a crowd of adoption activists, "If you'd have paid me more than NCFA, I'd have gladly worked for open records on your side." pb... "OR was the best little victory $150,000 could buy." --Bill Pierce, Ph.D., on the success of Measure 58 in Oregon

Sure, give me two million dollars and I'll have records opened in California in
a year and a half. That's what it would cost to run a ballot initiative here.
Oregon was a bargain. Nearly all of that went to getting the proposition on the
ballot. And what Pierce didn't mention was that once M58 was on the ballot, the
budgets for both sides were nearly equal, which meant in a fair fight he lost.

Ron

Jackie

01-17-2004, 10:30 AM

On Sat, 17 Jan 2004 05:39:48 -0800, pb... <woodlark-99@newsguy.com>
wrote:
I'll always remember that old joker himself, Bill Pierce, who happilytold a crowd of adoption activists, "If you'd have paid me more thanNCFA, I'd have gladly worked for open records on your side."

Talk about speaking ill of the dead.

IMO you misinterpreted what he said Patty. If he actually said that.
In my private emails with him I found him very true to his cause..
That is what I respect about the man..

Jackie

Tm n Kat

01-17-2004, 10:40 AM

>Subject: Re: Bill Pierce? ConfirmedFrom: Ron Morgan rhyzome1@earthlink.netDate: 1/17/2004
Sure, give me two million dollars and I'll have records opened in Californiaina year and a half.

Damn, if I had 2 mil, I would give it to you Ron, although my wish is for
Illinois to open someday. If I had much less, I'd buy a home with a yard for
my grandaughter to play in, or at least put a downpayment on one. Aren't there
any wealthy adoptees interested in the cause? Kathy J

Ron Morgan

01-17-2004, 11:20 AM

"Marley Greiner" <maddogmarley@worldnet.att.net> wrote in message
news:8iTNb.48412$6y6.997221@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net... "Dian" <patrice68@bigpond.com.au> wrote in message news:c599139c.0401160600.179b025f@posting.google.c om... Steve White <steve@spam.me.never> wrote in message news:<steve-DE816C.00384516012004@netnews.comcast.net>... In article <20040114164206.29591.00002566@mb-m02.aol.com>, reneekarynracine@aol.comhomesafe (Kathy T) wrote:

He did indeed. Like all shrewd politicians he declawed his opponents by befriending them. Then played them like a fiddle. And won. Di Hardly. Marley

Di is making **** up out of whole cloth so she can cluck her tongue... An
explanation of how Pierce played you would be an interesting exposition of
fantasy.

Ron

Ron Morgan

01-17-2004, 11:20 AM

"Tm n Kat" <tmnkat@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20040117134039.22865.00000157@mb-m04.aol.com...Subject: Re: Bill Pierce? ConfirmedFrom: Ron Morgan rhyzome1@earthlink.netDate: 1/17/2004Sure, give me two million dollars and I'll have records opened in
Californiaina year and a half. Damn, if I had 2 mil, I would give it to you Ron, although my wish is for Illinois to open someday. If I had much less, I'd buy a home with a yard
for my grandaughter to play in, or at least put a downpayment on one. Aren't
there any wealthy adoptees interested in the cause? Kathy J

There might be. In the months after M58's victory at the polls, I got calls
from a couple of consultant firms asking if we wanted them to run ballot
campaigns for us. As pros, they saw open records as a winner, it drew
petition signatures to qualify for the ballot like flies to honey, it didn't
raise taxes. An even cheaper route would be the legislature. The quote I got
from one of the top governmental relations (read lobbying hired gun) firms
in LA was around $75k, half for them and half for TV, radio, and print ads.

In real political terms it would be cheap to overturn sealed records. Taking
Pierce's figure of $150,000 for M58's victory as gospel (it was closer to
125K), then it cost $0.25 per yes vote. Gavin Newsom, our new mayor in SF,
spent close to $4M for 118,000 votes last December, that's around $34/vote,
and he nearly lost to an opponent who spent $100K.

Of course, paying Pierce $100K/year was cheap to keep records sealed, but he
was operating in a clear field for decades without significant interference.

Ron

pb...

01-17-2004, 11:27 AM

On Sat, 17 Jan 2004 09:17:55 -0500, Jackie <forgetit@me.com> writes:
On Fri, 16 Jan 2004 18:46:59 -0000, "helicon" <helicon@eircom.net>wrote:Di wrote.. He did indeed. Like all shrewd politicians he declawed his opponents by befriending them. Then played them like a fiddle. And won.That's not true. IMHOHe befriended me.. Wrote to me private..I tried to discuss opening up adoption and he cut me off cold..Jackie

I've no valid reason to doubt your word on this, Jackie...but it does
seem a bit lopsided -- considering your current stand that adoptees
*must* respect their birth parent(s), regardless of any circumstance,
mitigating or otherwise. Was Pierce aware of your feelings on that
issue?

pb...

http://bastards.org/bb/7.UAA.html

pb...

01-17-2004, 11:34 AM

On Sat, 17 Jan 2004 17:47:10 GMT, Ron Morgan <rhyzome1@earthlink.net> writes:
"pb..." wrote: On Sat, 17 Jan 2004 11:57:59 GMT, Ron Morgan <rhyzome1@earthlink.net> writes:The state responds to power. Pierce, as an industrial lobbyist, had moneypower, adoptees have people power but thus far haven't figured out howto sustain and grow it. Exactly. It's not all that unusual that the ones with people power have yet to discover it's right there under the skin -- kind of like Dorothy who'd always *had* the power (ruby slippers) to get home to Kansas. Pierce had a JOB to do...he was hired, paid an excellent salary w/benefits, and was well briefed in what he was expected to accomplish in his position as an "industrial lobbyist" -- OTOH, people power folks must first learn that they aren't alone in their needs...it takes longer for some than others, before they climb up on that big band wagon and start making noise. There's a damned good reason why the old saw, "Money talks, bull**** walks" has been around for so long -- I wouldn't doubt that every culture on this earth has a saying/proverb/whatever that says, in so many words, "Them what has gets more." I'll always remember that old joker himself, Bill Pierce, who happily told a crowd of adoption activists, "If you'd have paid me more than NCFA, I'd have gladly worked for open records on your side." pb... "OR was the best little victory $150,000 could buy." --Bill Pierce, Ph.D., on the success of Measure 58 in OregonSure, give me two million dollars and I'll have records opened inCalifornia in a year and a half. That's what it would cost to run aballot initiative here. Oregon was a bargain. Nearly all of thatwent to getting the proposition on the ballot. And what Piercedidn't mention was that once M58 was on the ballot, the budgetsfor both sides were nearly equal, which meant in a fair fight he lost.Ron

Okay, I'll buy that. However, doesn't that tarnish the gentleman's
image a wee bit? ...not to mention the NCFA? or IAAVAN? Pierce
lied outright, and by omission, far too many times than I'd care to
calculate.

pb...

pb...

01-17-2004, 11:46 AM

On Sat, 17 Jan 2004 13:30:33 -0500, Jackie <forgetit@me.com> writes:
On Sat, 17 Jan 2004 05:39:48 -0800, pb... <woodlark-99@newsguy.com>wrote:I'll always remember that old joker himself, Bill Pierce, who happilytold a crowd of adoption activists, "If you'd have paid me more thanNCFA, I'd have gladly worked for open records on your side."Talk about speaking ill of the dead.

Since when is TRUTH speaking ill of the dead?
IMO you misinterpreted what he said Patty. If he actually said that.

I was not alone in my interpretation, Jackie...I WAS THERE. So were
many others who will validate the experience and the statement. You
have no more idea of what made Pierce tick than you do any others on
this news group whom you've never met in person.
In my private emails with him I found him very true to his cause..

Undoubtedly. Sadly, his cause was to withhold vital information from
adults who never ever did one thing to deserve that kind of treatment.
That is what I respect about the man..Jackie

So, do you always respect liars?

pb...

http://bastards.org/bb/7.UAA.html

Ron Morgan

01-17-2004, 12:54 PM

"Jackie" <forgetit@me.com> wrote in message
news:blvi00lcg5v17nr996mchllmje0rii09th@4ax.com... On Sat, 17 Jan 2004 05:39:48 -0800, pb... <woodlark-99@newsguy.com> wrote:I'll always remember that old joker himself, Bill Pierce, who happilytold a crowd of adoption activists, "If you'd have paid me more thanNCFA, I'd have gladly worked for open records on your side." Talk about speaking ill of the dead. IMO you misinterpreted what he said Patty. If he actually said that. In my private emails with him I found him very true to his cause.. That is what I respect about the man..

He was a True Believer. That's what made him so dangerous.

Ron Jackie

Ron Morgan

01-17-2004, 12:54 PM

"pb..." <woodlark-99@newsguy.com> wrote in message
news:bd3j005h7rantkircbu35k2ae1310amhkf@4ax.com... On Sat, 17 Jan 2004 17:47:10 GMT, Ron Morgan <rhyzome1@earthlink.net>
writes:"pb..." wrote: On Sat, 17 Jan 2004 11:57:59 GMT, Ron Morgan <rhyzome1@earthlink.net>
writes: >The state responds to power. Pierce, as an industrial lobbyist, had
money >power, adoptees have people power but thus far haven't figured out how >to sustain and grow it. Exactly. It's not all that unusual that the ones with people power have yet to discover it's right there under the skin -- kind of like Dorothy who'd always *had* the power (ruby slippers) to get home to Kansas. Pierce had a JOB to do...he was hired, paid an excellent salary
w/benefits, and was well briefed in what he was expected to accomplish in his
position as an "industrial lobbyist" -- OTOH, people power folks must first
learn that they aren't alone in their needs...it takes longer for some than
others, before they climb up on that big band wagon and start making noise. There's a damned good reason why the old saw, "Money talks, bull**** walks" has been around for so long -- I wouldn't doubt that every culture on this earth has a saying/proverb/whatever that says, in so many words, "Them what has gets more." I'll always remember that old joker himself, Bill Pierce, who happily told a crowd of adoption activists, "If you'd have paid me more than NCFA, I'd have gladly worked for open records on your side." pb... "OR was the best little victory $150,000 could buy." --Bill Pierce, Ph.D., on the success of Measure 58 in OregonSure, give me two million dollars and I'll have records opened inCalifornia in a year and a half. That's what it would cost to run aballot initiative here. Oregon was a bargain. Nearly all of thatwent to getting the proposition on the ballot. And what Piercedidn't mention was that once M58 was on the ballot, the budgetsfor both sides were nearly equal, which meant in a fair fight he lost.Ron Okay, I'll buy that. However, doesn't that tarnish the gentleman's image a wee bit?

Sure did, which is why he would downplay NCFA's involvement in the M58
campaign, like his alt.adoption exchange with Marley, to distance himself
from the defeat. Pierce tried to get invited into the campaign, he
volunteered NCFA resources to the No on 58 campaign and they turned him
down. By 1998 he'd alienated so many people within the industry that they
didn't even want his help. This was told to me personally by No on 58's
spokewoman, after a radio interview with both of us. I mentioned Pierce and
she got a look on her face as if she'd stepped in dog poop. But Pierce did
invest himself, and probably NCFA resources in the unsuccessful lawsuits
challenging M58, he helped conduct the outreach to fnd the plaintiffs, and
he put his reputational capital on the line in amicus briefs defending
sealed records. His projected retrospective combination of bravado and
modesty regarding his role in M58 was damage control; his cause lost in the
most public and democratic of decisions, and then it lost in deliberative
appeal before the judiciary, and worst of all his presumed allies repudiated
his offer to help.

....not to mention the NCFA? or IAAVAN?

I'm not sure IAAVAN is much more than a website. It'll be interesting to see
what happens with IAAVAN now that Pierce is gone.

Ron

Pierce lied outright, and by omission, far too many times than I'd care to calculate. pb...

Roberta

01-17-2004, 04:16 PM

>He befriended me.. Wrote to me private..I tried to discuss opening up adoption and he cut me off cold..Jackie

He *befriended* you? Did he invite you over for coffee?

He wrote to a lot of people when he found something interesting in what they
posted. I think that's why a lot of people diametrically opposed to what he
stood for have posted here indicating their regrets at his passing.

Roberta
mom to Juliette, 7, adopted from China

Dian

01-18-2004, 07:32 AM

robyf@aol.comnojunk (Roberta) wrote in message news:<20040117191635.24654.00000152@mb-m16.aol.com>...He befriended me.. Wrote to me private..I tried to discuss opening up adoption and he cut me off cold..Jackie He *befriended* you? Did he invite you over for coffee?
You could ask the same of everyone he "befriended" and yet you pick on Jackie. Why?
He wrote to a lot of people when he found something interesting in what they posted. I think that's why a lot of people diametrically opposed to what he stood for have posted here indicating their regrets at his passing.
People are easily bought.

Di

Roberta mom to Juliette, 7, adopted from China

Jackie

01-18-2004, 07:39 AM

On Sat, 17 Jan 2004 11:27:57 -0800, pb... <woodlark-99@newsguy.com>
wrote:
On Sat, 17 Jan 2004 09:17:55 -0500, Jackie <forgetit@me.com> writes:On Fri, 16 Jan 2004 18:46:59 -0000, "helicon" <helicon@eircom.net>wrote:Di wrote..> He did indeed. Like all shrewd politicians he declawed his opponents> by befriending them. Then played them like a fiddle. And won.That's not true. IMHOHe befriended me.. Wrote to me private..I tried to discuss opening up adoption and he cut me off cold..JackieI've no valid reason to doubt your word on this, Jackie...but it doesseem a bit lopsided -- considering your current stand that adoptees*must* respect their birth parent(s), regardless of any circumstance,mitigating or otherwise. Was Pierce aware of your feelings on thatissue?

Are you aware of my feelings on this issue?

Jackie

Jackie

01-18-2004, 07:43 AM

On Sat, 17 Jan 2004 11:46:13 -0800, pb... <woodlark-99@newsguy.com>
wrote:
On Sat, 17 Jan 2004 13:30:33 -0500, Jackie <forgetit@me.com> writes:On Sat, 17 Jan 2004 05:39:48 -0800, pb... <woodlark-99@newsguy.com>wrote:I'll always remember that old joker himself, Bill Pierce, who happilytold a crowd of adoption activists, "If you'd have paid me more thanNCFA, I'd have gladly worked for open records on your side."Talk about speaking ill of the dead.Since when is TRUTH speaking ill of the dead?IMO you misinterpreted what he said Patty. If he actually said that.I was not alone in my interpretation, Jackie...I WAS THERE. So weremany others who will validate the experience and the statement. Youhave no more idea of what made Pierce tick than you do any others onthis news group whom you've never met in person.In my private emails with him I found him very true to his cause..Undoubtedly. Sadly, his cause was to withhold vital information fromadults who never ever did one thing to deserve that kind of treatment.That is what I respect about the man..JackieSo, do you always respect liars?

I have met people on this news group Patty.. I went to a BN conference
in Sanfrancisco..

If the man was willing to change his belief's for money.. Then I do
have a rude awakening..

And I am very sorry if this is true..

Jackie

Jackie

01-18-2004, 07:44 AM

On Sat, 17 Jan 2004 20:54:00 GMT, "Ron Morgan"
<rhyzome1@earthlink.net> wrote:
"Jackie" <forgetit@me.com> wrote in messagenews:blvi00lcg5v17nr996mchllmje0rii09th@4ax .com... On Sat, 17 Jan 2004 05:39:48 -0800, pb... <woodlark-99@newsguy.com> wrote:I'll always remember that old joker himself, Bill Pierce, who happilytold a crowd of adoption activists, "If you'd have paid me more thanNCFA, I'd have gladly worked for open records on your side." Talk about speaking ill of the dead. IMO you misinterpreted what he said Patty. If he actually said that. In my private emails with him I found him very true to his cause.. That is what I respect about the man..He was a True Believer. That's what made him so dangerous.

Thank you Ron..

I needed to hear that..

Because if that man did it for money.. IMO all is lost..

Jackie

Jackie

01-18-2004, 07:48 AM

On 18 Jan 2004 00:16:35 GMT, robyf@aol.comnojunk (Roberta) wrote:
He befriended me.. Wrote to me private..I tried to discuss opening up adoption and he cut me off cold..JackieHe *befriended* you? Did he invite you over for coffee?

No just email responses.. I think he was checking me out.
Try and find out where I was coming from.
I also corresponded with one of the women who wanted contact veto's..
A woman who was connected to Bill..
He wrote to a lot of people when he found something interesting in what theyposted. I think that's why a lot of people diametrically opposed to what hestood for have posted here indicating their regrets at his passing.

As I have..

I said "Rest in Peace" here and on adoption.com the minute I learned
that he died.. I still say it.

Shall I go and find my message to prove to you I did this?
Will you like me if I do this?
Will I be accepted?

Jackie

Dian

01-18-2004, 08:04 AM

"Ron Morgan" <rhyzome1@earthlink.net> wrote in message news:<IhhOb.13315$1e.7469@newsread2.news.pas.earthlink.n et>... "Jackie" <forgetit@me.com> wrote in message news:blvi00lcg5v17nr996mchllmje0rii09th@4ax.com... On Sat, 17 Jan 2004 05:39:48 -0800, pb... <woodlark-99@newsguy.com> wrote:I'll always remember that old joker himself, Bill Pierce, who happilytold a crowd of adoption activists, "If you'd have paid me more thanNCFA, I'd have gladly worked for open records on your side." Talk about speaking ill of the dead. IMO you misinterpreted what he said Patty. If he actually said that. In my private emails with him I found him very true to his cause.. That is what I respect about the man.. He was a True Believer. That's what made him so dangerous. Ron
And that's why you admired him?

Jackie

pb...

01-18-2004, 09:49 AM

On Sun, 18 Jan 2004 10:39:28 -0500, Jackie <forgetit@me.com> writes:
On Sat, 17 Jan 2004 11:27:57 -0800, pb... <woodlark-99@newsguy.com>wrote:On Sat, 17 Jan 2004 09:17:55 -0500, Jackie <forgetit@me.com> writes:On Fri, 16 Jan 2004 18:46:59 -0000, "helicon" <helicon@eircom.net>wrote:Di wrote..>> He did indeed. Like all shrewd politicians he declawed his opponents>> by befriending them. Then played them like a fiddle. And won.>>That's not true. IMHOHe befriended me.. Wrote to me private..I tried to discuss opening up adoption and he cut me off cold..JackieI've no valid reason to doubt your word on this, Jackie...but it doesseem a bit lopsided -- considering your current stand that adoptees*must* respect their birth parent(s), regardless of any circumstance,mitigating or otherwise. Was Pierce aware of your feelings on thatissue?Are you aware of my feelings on this issue?Jackie

Only what you've written many times over.

pb...

Roberta

01-18-2004, 09:50 AM

>Subject: Re: Bill Pierce? ConfirmedFrom: Jackie forgetit@me.comDate: 1/18/04 10:48 AM Eastern Standard TimeMessage-id: <ifal001v6qatfk0lqpk3042vcat5eqj442@4ax.com>On 18 Jan 2004 00:16:35 GMT, robyf@aol.comnojunk (Roberta) wrote:He befriended me.. Wrote to me private..I tried to discuss opening up adoption and he cut me off cold..JackieHe *befriended* you? Did he invite you over for coffee?No just email responses.. I think he was checking me out.Try and find out where I was coming from.I also corresponded with one of the women who wanted contact veto's..A woman who was connected to Bill..He wrote to a lot of people when he found something interesting in what theyposted. I think that's why a lot of people diametrically opposed to what hestood for have posted here indicating their regrets at his passing.As I have..I said "Rest in Peace" here and on adoption.com the minute I learnedthat he died.. I still say it.Shall I go and find my message to prove to you I did this?

??? Where did I say you didn't?

Will you like me if I do this?

???
Will I be accepted?

?????Jackie

Roberta
mom to Juliette, 7, adopted from China

Tm n Kat

01-18-2004, 10:04 AM

>Subject: Re: Bill Pierce? ConfirmedFrom: Jackie forgetit@me.comDate: 1/18/2004
No just email responses.. I think he was checking me out.Try and find out where I was coming from.I also corresponded with one of the women who wanted contact veto's..A woman who was connected to Bill..

Interesting.
I said "Rest in Peace" here and on adoption.com the minute I learnedthat he died.. I still say it.

Yes, I agree, may he Rest in Peace. Bill and my birthdad had the same beliefs,
they were both products of that same generation, and he (my birthdad) missed
out on knowing his son. Regarding the changing sides for $$ quote, I think he
most likely said it in humor but I could be wrong. He was pretty dedicated to
his cause. Kathy J

Ron Morgan

01-18-2004, 10:14 AM

"Dian" <patrice68@bigpond.com.au> wrote in message
news:c599139c.0401180804.2b3cd4c@posting.google.co m... "Ron Morgan" <rhyzome1@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:<IhhOb.13315$1e.7469@newsread2.news.pas.earthlink.n et>... "Jackie" <forgetit@me.com> wrote in message news:blvi00lcg5v17nr996mchllmje0rii09th@4ax.com... On Sat, 17 Jan 2004 05:39:48 -0800, pb... <woodlark-99@newsguy.com> wrote: >I'll always remember that old joker himself, Bill Pierce, who happily >told a crowd of adoption activists, "If you'd have paid me more than >NCFA, I'd have gladly worked for open records on your side." Talk about speaking ill of the dead. IMO you misinterpreted what he said Patty. If he actually said that. In my private emails with him I found him very true to his cause.. That is what I respect about the man.. He was a True Believer. That's what made him so dangerous. Ron And that's why you admired him?

Yeah, like Patton admired Rommel.

Who knows, Di, if we ever met we might like each other too...

Ron Jackie

Steve White

01-18-2004, 02:48 PM

In article <12AOb.15604$1e.5086@newsread2.news.pas.earthlink.n et>,
"Ron Morgan" <rhyzome1@earthlink.net> wrote:

And that's why you admired him? Yeah, like Patton admired Rommel. Who knows, Di, if we ever met we might like each other too...

Don't go getting all wierd on us now, Ron :-)

steve

Dian

01-19-2004, 05:22 AM

"Ron Morgan" <rhyzome1@earthlink.net> wrote in message news:<12AOb.15604$1e.5086@newsread2.news.pas.earthlink.n et>... "Dian" <patrice68@bigpond.com.au> wrote in message news:c599139c.0401180804.2b3cd4c@posting.google.co m... "Ron Morgan" <rhyzome1@earthlink.net> wrote in message news:<IhhOb.13315$1e.7469@newsread2.news.pas.earthlink.n et>... "Jackie" <forgetit@me.com> wrote in message news:blvi00lcg5v17nr996mchllmje0rii09th@4ax.com... > On Sat, 17 Jan 2004 05:39:48 -0800, pb... <woodlark-99@newsguy.com> > wrote: > > >I'll always remember that old joker himself, Bill Pierce, who happily > >told a crowd of adoption activists, "If you'd have paid me more than > >NCFA, I'd have gladly worked for open records on your side." > > > Talk about speaking ill of the dead. > > IMO you misinterpreted what he said Patty. If he actually said that. > In my private emails with him I found him very true to his cause.. > That is what I respect about the man.. He was a True Believer. That's what made him so dangerous. Ron > And that's why you admired him? Yeah, like Patton admired Rommel. Who knows, Di, if we ever met we might like each other too... Ron

Indeed. Stranger things have happened:-)

Di > > Jackie

kat

01-19-2004, 04:32 PM

"Steve White" <steve@spam.me.never> wrote in message
news:steve-49BD50.16483318012004@netnews.comcast.net... In article <12AOb.15604$1e.5086@newsread2.news.pas.earthlink.n et>, "Ron Morgan" <rhyzome1@earthlink.net> wrote: And that's why you admired him? Yeah, like Patton admired Rommel. Who knows, Di, if we ever met we might like each other too... Don't go getting all wierd on us now, Ron :-) steve

Well he *did* hug Dr. Laura afterall so Di isn't that much of a stretch ;)

Kathy 1

kat

01-19-2004, 04:34 PM

"Ron Morgan" <rhyzome1@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:12AOb.15604$1e.5086@newsread2.news.pas.earthl ink.net... "Dian" <patrice68@bigpond.com.au> wrote in message news:c599139c.0401180804.2b3cd4c@posting.google.co m... "Ron Morgan" <rhyzome1@earthlink.net> wrote in message news:<IhhOb.13315$1e.7469@newsread2.news.pas.earthlink.n et>... "Jackie" <forgetit@me.com> wrote in message news:blvi00lcg5v17nr996mchllmje0rii09th@4ax.com... > On Sat, 17 Jan 2004 05:39:48 -0800, pb... <woodlark-99@newsguy.com> > wrote: > > >I'll always remember that old joker himself, Bill Pierce, who
happily > >told a crowd of adoption activists, "If you'd have paid me more
than > >NCFA, I'd have gladly worked for open records on your side." > > > Talk about speaking ill of the dead. > > IMO you misinterpreted what he said Patty. If he actually said that. > In my private emails with him I found him very true to his cause.. > That is what I respect about the man.. He was a True Believer. That's what made him so dangerous. Ron > And that's why you admired him? Yeah, like Patton admired Rommel. Who knows, Di, if we ever met we might like each other too... Ron

There you go again Ron. . . looking for love in all the wrong places ;)

Kathy 1

Lainie Petersen

01-19-2004, 09:59 PM

patrice68@bigpond.com.au (Dian) wrote in message news:<c599139c.0401190522.490ef944@posting.google.com>...
> He was a True Believer. That's what made him so dangerous. > > Ron > > And that's why you admired him? Yeah, like Patton admired Rommel. Who knows, Di, if we ever met we might like each other too... Ron Indeed. Stranger things have happened:-) Di

I for one, do not admire "true believers", nor do I admire people who
are "strong believers" in causes that are bad.

Bill Pierce was one of the truest believers that I have ever seen. As
a "true believer" I think that his identity had become wrapped up with
his cause "for" adoption and secrecy. Any challenge to "the cause" was
a challenge to his own identity. He ended up defending absurd
positions because he couldn't stomach even the most reasonable of
challenges.

I have mixed feelings about Bill, though I am certainly sorry that he
has died and suffered so much in his battle with cancer. He left a
legacy that has caused a lot of suffering for many people. I cannot
profess admiration for this legacy nor for the personal convictions
that promoted it.

At the same time, he was always kind and gracious to myself. He was a
human being that I interacted with, and who clearly had much good in
him. I am sorry that he is gone.

L.

Marley Greiner

01-21-2004, 08:38 PM

"Dian" <patrice68@bigpond.com.au> wrote in message
news:c599139c.0401180803.6cbf274c@posting.google.c om... Ron Morgan <rhyzome1@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:<40096501.5F3994FA@earthlink.net>... Dian wrote: > Pierce's power extended only to convincing legislators to preserve a
state run system that denies us our rights. And you see that as his ONLY power, Ron? That is ALL the power he required to keep you down. Yup. That's all. It doesn't take much when your opponents think of
themselves as victims, slaves and subalterns, internalizing the oppression,
being advised by their leaders that they are unable to help themselves. Bill did that to BN members?

No, but there are approximately 6 million adopted persons in this country
today who won't get off their fat bottoms because they can't bear to do
their own work, "dirty" their hands in politics, and enjoy wallowing in
victim status. For every activist there are thousands of couch sitters who
want you to do their work for them. You can't even get them to thank you
for helping in their own searches. I can't tell you how many people I've
assisted in searching (gratis) that never even bother to say thanks. The
regulars here on aa are some of the most literature an active adoption
people that I've ever met. Visit run-of-the-mill adoption lists. They're
full of angels, wounds, and whining, not to mention a total ignorance of
industry and industrial power. And they do NOT want to hear anything that
disturbs their sleep. Ultimately, the state oppresses us. The State would not have oppressed you if your argument was solely between you and them. Bill thought he knew better than you and the State took his side. The state responds to power. Pierce, as an industrial lobbyist, had
money power, adoptees have people power but thusfar haven't figured out how
to sustain and grow it.

Bill was sometimes compared to the gun and Israeli lobbies. And yet you befriended him. Even admired him for his power in opposing you.

You learn from your enemies, not you friends.

cut

My right to my identity exists autonomously from any state, it exists whether the state recognizes it or not. I exercised my right to my identity when I
searched and found outside the system. Bill stood in your way. His power with the State lay in the fact that by his vehement new promotion of infant adoption in the early 80's (when it was all but over) he was saving them billions in supporting benefits to single women. The State gave him what he wanted because he was protecting the interests of adoption by protecting the interests of adoptive families who did not want records opened. He was a friend of the State. Now you're advancing a completely contradictory argument; No not contradictory at all. They go hand in hand. A party that protects the privacy of adoptive families protects closed records. on the one hand you argue that sealed records would have withered away without Pierce's intervention, And it would have but for Bill. The NCFA is the only significant opposition you've had to deal with. At least no others have been mentioned uynless i've missed them. Their umbrella group, the now toothless APPG was the only forceful opposition in our own fight for open records as well. Bill's 99 year vetoes, and in Qld vetoes against both contact AND information, are his legacy to us. Without its interference in adoptees rights there would have been no veto system. His tenaticles spread across the sea. For that reason the issue of Bill is also ours in Oz. Di +'

I may have missed something in this thread . Bill never put forward the
veto idea. Vetoes came from the adoption reform movement itself, and we've
had to pay for it ever since. It was the "good guys" who sold our rights
away for the pleasure of some. I'm not sure where the first disclosure veto
came from, but it was certainly not from NCFA or the industry. They've been
around for at least 10 years, and most likely longer. A few years ago in
Delaware, the AAC amended their pure open records bill at the last minute
with a disclosure veto out of fear it wouldn't pass otherwise (they were
*1-2* votes short out of committee with several days to go until the vote
was taken. ) Don't get me started on this!. The contact veto came straight
out of the TN open records movement because they felt they could not get
unhindered access without it. The blame for these debacles and sell-outs
needs to be placed at the feett of the people who did it: Tjhe Benedict
Bastard adoption reformers, with their reunionist ideology and their warped
belief that gradualism ("baby steps" is what they always call them) .
Vetoes have made our job extremely difficult since the pols don't like to
revisit something. We gave you this, now you want that, you ungrateful
bints.

Unfortunatley, in the US, the politics of grievance haven't seeped up into
the privildge classes.

Marley

Windforest

01-21-2004, 09:57 PM

Re: Bill Pierce? Confirmed

Group: alt.adoption Date: Sun, Jan 18, 2004, 9:49am (MST-1) From:
woodlark-99@newsguy.com (pb...)
On Sun, 18 Jan 2004 10:39:28 -0500, Jackie <forgetit@me.com> writes:
On Sat, 17 Jan 2004 11:27:57 -0800, pb... <woodlark-99@newsguy.com>
wrote:
On Sat, 17 Jan 2004 09:17:55 -0500, Jackie <forgetit@me.com> writes:
On Fri, 16 Jan 2004 18:46:59 -0000, "helicon" <helicon@eircom.net>
wrote:
Di wrote..
He did indeed. Like all shrewd politicians he declawed his opponents by
befriending them. Then played them like a fiddle. And won.
That's not true. IMHO
He befriended me.. Wrote to me private..
I tried to discuss opening up adoption and he cut me off cold..
Jackie
I've no valid reason to doubt your word on this, Jackie...but it does
seem a bit lopsided -- considering your current stand that adoptees
*must* respect their birth parent(s), regardless of any circumstance,
mitigating or otherwise. Was Pierce aware of your feelings on that
issue?
Are you aware of my feelings on this issue?
Jackie
Only what you've written many times over.
pb...

Then you need to read for comprehension patty. Because I don't see that
you ARE aware of jackie's feelings on this. I SEE that you are aware of
the groups perceptions of jackie's feelings. It isn't quite the same
thing. What it is. is High School bull**** by so called adults. Now
Roberta is joining the gang of bullying tactics. You all must be so
proud of yourselves.
Congrats and see ya
Windforest

Robin Harritt

01-22-2004, 01:24 AM

in article 4710-400F6636-232@storefull-3214.bay.webtv.net, Windforest at
badaii@webtv.net wrote on 22/1/04 5:57 am:
Re: Bill Pierce? Confirmed Group: alt.adoption Date: Sun, Jan 18, 2004, 9:49am (MST-1) From: woodlark-99@newsguy.com (pb...) On Sun, 18 Jan 2004 10:39:28 -0500, Jackie <forgetit@me.com> writes: On Sat, 17 Jan 2004 11:27:57 -0800, pb... <woodlark-99@newsguy.com> wrote: On Sat, 17 Jan 2004 09:17:55 -0500, Jackie <forgetit@me.com> writes: On Fri, 16 Jan 2004 18:46:59 -0000, "helicon" <helicon@eircom.net> wrote: Di wrote.. He did indeed. Like all shrewd politicians he declawed his opponents by befriending them. Then played them like a fiddle. And won. That's not true. IMHO He befriended me.. Wrote to me private.. I tried to discuss opening up adoption and he cut me off cold.. Jackie I've no valid reason to doubt your word on this, Jackie...but it does seem a bit lopsided -- considering your current stand that adoptees *must* respect their birth parent(s), regardless of any circumstance, mitigating or otherwise. Was Pierce aware of your feelings on that issue? Are you aware of my feelings on this issue? Jackie Only what you've written many times over. pb...

Sorry I can't sort out that mess of quoting.
Then you need to read for comprehension patty.

Umm...I don't think it's Patty who needs to read for comprehension.

Because I don't see that you ARE aware of jackie's feelings on this.

I'm sure Patty, just like the rest of us, is perfectly well aware of what
Jackie's feelings are.

I SEE that you are aware of the groups perceptions of jackie's feelings. It isn't quite the same thing.

A whole bunch of people share the same perception, one person doesn't,
people can draw their own conclusion from that.

What it is. is High School bull**** by so called adults.

The high school gang thing is just a part of how alt.adoption works but
there's nothing bull**** about any of it where Jackie concerned.

Now Roberta is joining the gang of bullying tactics. You all must be so proud of yourselves.
Congrats and see ya
Windforest

So what? You'd like us all to bow down to Jackie's distorted perceptions?
Ain't going to happen.

Robin

Jackie

01-22-2004, 07:25 AM

On Wed, 21 Jan 2004 22:57:10 -0700 (MST), badaii@webtv.net
(Windforest) wrote:
Re: Bill Pierce? ConfirmedGroup: alt.adoption Date: Sun, Jan 18, 2004, 9:49am (MST-1) From:woodlark-99@newsguy.com (pb...)On Sun, 18 Jan 2004 10:39:28 -0500, Jackie <forgetit@me.com> writes:On Sat, 17 Jan 2004 11:27:57 -0800, pb... <woodlark-99@newsguy.com>wrote:On Sat, 17 Jan 2004 09:17:55 -0500, Jackie <forgetit@me.com> writes:On Fri, 16 Jan 2004 18:46:59 -0000, "helicon" <helicon@eircom.net>wrote:Di wrote..He did indeed. Like all shrewd politicians he declawed his opponents bybefriending them. Then played them like a fiddle. And won.That's not true. IMHOHe befriended me.. Wrote to me private..I tried to discuss opening up adoption and he cut me off cold..JackieI've no valid reason to doubt your word on this, Jackie...but it doesseem a bit lopsided -- considering your current stand that adoptees*must* respect their birth parent(s), regardless of any circumstance,mitigating or otherwise. Was Pierce aware of your feelings on thatissue?Are you aware of my feelings on this issue?JackieOnly what you've written many times over.pb...Then you need to read for comprehension patty. Because I don't see thatyou ARE aware of jackie's feelings on this. I SEE that you are aware ofthe groups perceptions of jackie's feelings. It isn't quite the samething. What it is. is High School bull**** by so called adults. NowRoberta is joining the gang of bullying tactics. You all must be soproud of yourselves.Congrats and see yaWindforest

Contact veto's give the power to the wrong people..

In reunion the power should reside *equally* with the two people
reuniting..

Jackie

Dian

01-22-2004, 08:19 AM

"Marley Greiner" <maddogmarley@worldnet.att.net> wrote in message news:<utIPb.84408$6y6.1698292@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net>... "Dian" <patrice68@bigpond.com.au> wrote in message news:c599139c.0401180803.6cbf274c@posting.google.c om... Ron Morgan <rhyzome1@earthlink.net> wrote in message news:<40096501.5F3994FA@earthlink.net>... Dian wrote: > > Pierce's power extended only to convincing legislators to preserve a state run system that denies us our rights. > > And you see that as his ONLY power, Ron? That is ALL the power he > required to keep you down. Yup. That's all. It doesn't take much when your opponents think of themselves as victims, slaves and subalterns, internalizing the oppression, being advised by their leaders that they are unable to help themselves. Bill did that to BN members? No, but there are approximately 6 million adopted persons in this country today who won't get off their fat bottoms because they can't bear to do their own work, "dirty" their hands in politics, and enjoy wallowing in victim status. For every activist there are thousands of couch sitters who want you to do their work for them. You can't even get them to thank you for helping in their own searches. I can't tell you how many people I've assisted in searching (gratis) that never even bother to say thanks. The regulars here on aa are some of the most literature an active adoption people that I've ever met. Visit run-of-the-mill adoption lists. They're full of angels, wounds, and whining, not to mention a total ignorance of industry and industrial power. And they do NOT want to hear anything that disturbs their sleep.

Been there and done that too, Marley. I know the frustration only too
well. But the bottom line is that we make the decision to put our
money where our mouths are, on their behalf. No matter how big a
membership is there is always only a few people who actually do the
work it takes to bring about change. People genrally become complacent
when they know their cause if being fought for by others. Though
they'd be the first to scream blue murder if you threw in the towel.
Ultimately, the state oppresses us. > > The State would not have oppressed you if your argument was solely > between you and them. Bill thought he knew better than you and the > State took his side. The state responds to power. Pierce, as an industrial lobbyist, had money power, adoptees have people power but thusfar haven't figured out how to sustain and grow it. Bill was sometimes compared to the gun and Israeli lobbies. And yet you befriended him. Even admired him for his power in opposing you. You learn from your enemies, not you friends.

That's why you should never befriend them. > cut My right to my identity exists autonomously from any state, it exists whether the state recognizes it or not. I exercised my right to my identity when I searched and found outside the system. > > Bill stood in your way. His power with the State lay in the fact that > by his vehement new > promotion of infant adoption in the early 80's (when it was all but > over) he was saving them billions in supporting benefits to single > women. The State gave him what he wanted because he was protecting the > interests of adoption by protecting the interests of adoptive families > who did not want records opened. > He was a friend of the State. Now you're advancing a completely contradictory argument; No not contradictory at all. They go hand in hand. A party that protects the privacy of adoptive families protects closed records. on the one hand you argue that sealed records would have withered away without Pierce's intervention, And it would have but for Bill. The NCFA is the only significant opposition you've had to deal with. At least no others have been mentioned uynless i've missed them. Their umbrella group, the now toothless APPG was the only forceful opposition in our own fight for open records as well. Bill's 99 year vetoes, and in Qld vetoes against both contact AND information, are his legacy to us. Without its interference in adoptees rights there would have been no veto system. His tenaticles spread across the sea. For that reason the issue of Bill is also ours in Oz. Di +' I may have missed something in this thread . Bill never put forward the veto idea.

While mutual contact registers have been around since 1972, while
records were still closed, the idea of using them to oppose open
records belongs ot Bill, or at least his NCFA.

A mutual contact register is in and of itself a contact veto where
only on the say so of both parties can either party access identifying
information about each other. A mutual contact register places a veto
on every adoptee until his mother sees fit to register her name
allowing contact to be made.

The Australia veto system holds no-one hostage to that level of
control. to placate the frightened few it wa sdecided ot introduce a
veto system where the individual mother or adoptee could lodge their
own objection to contact. That said, in all states bar Qld the adopted
person who receives a veto against contact still maintains all rights
to access all of his identifying information upon turning 18. Which is
what I understood was the primary concern of BN - the legal right to
access their OBC's with reunions aka contact, being an incedental
aspect of the primary goals.

Every adoptee in Oz has that legal right, as I said, except Qld where
the APPG aka NCFA was a powerful force and introduced vetoes against
both contact AND IDENTIFYING INFORMATION. The APPG was and is still
headed by adoptive parents who used the same tactics as the NCFA of
putting up nmothers to be used as
a smoke screen for their own personal agenda'a, which was to avoid
telling their adopted children they were adopted and interferring in
the adoptive family dynamics. They in turn scouted for a few nmothers
who oppsed contact and used them as a front. That's what it was really
all about.

The only way they got their way at the 11th hour was to blackmail the
then Premier of Qld by threatening to go public with the extra marital
affair her was having at the time. It would have ruined his career,
and so a few days
before legislation was to pass the double barrelled veto system was
passed and the whole fight against vetoes in Qld collapsed.

http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/other/nswlrc/rpt69/00132.html
Impact of the Act on adoptive parents: conclusions
5.136 The majority of adoptive parents appear to be strongly opposed
to the Act, especially insofar as it gives information rights to birth
parents. A sizeable minority, on the other hand, support the Act, but
are generally more enthusiastic about the granting of rights to
adoptees than to birth parents. Most of the written submissions from
adoptive parents opposed to the Act took a strong form. They said that
the retrospective operation of the Act was a breach of the `contract'
under which they accepted children for adoption, which they saw as
guaranteeing that identifying information would not be released. They
doubt the effectiveness of the contact veto, and advocate a law under
which identifying information is only released where both parties have
agreed in advance, or, at least, that the veto should be such as to
prevent the release of identifying information. However it was clear
that some adoptive parents, probably under-represented in the written
submissions, took a more tentative and ambivalent view.

Vetoes came from the adoption reform movement itself, and we've had to pay for it ever since.

Not actually true, Marley. Individual vetoes derived as a direct
result of overcoming the mutual contact registry argument. Which is as
I've mentioned a veto against every adoptee wanting his identifying
info and having to wait until his mother also lists herself. If she
never does he never gets his info. The veto system is directly linked
to the NCFA policy on privacy.

It was the "good guys" who sold our rights away for the pleasure of some. I'm not sure where the first disclosure veto came from, but it was certainly not from NCFA or the industry.

I hazard to tell you this but it was Australia. Most US and Canadian
State have modelled their Bills and Acts on the NSW model.
http://www.parliament.nsw.gov.au/Prod/Parlment/HansArt.nsf/0/ca256d11000bd3aa4a25644b00093be2?OpenDocument

They've been around for at least 10 years, and most likely longer.

1988 South Australia.

A few years ago in Delaware, the AAC amended their pure open records bill at the last minute with a disclosure veto out of fear it wouldn't pass otherwise (they were *1-2* votes short out of committee with several days to go until the vote was taken. ) Don't get me started on this!. The contact veto came straight out of the TN open records movement because they felt they could not get unhindered access without it. The blame for these debacles and sell-outs needs to be placed at the feett of the people who did it: Tjhe Benedict Bastard adoption reformers, with their reunionist ideology and their warped belief that gradualism ("baby steps" is what they always call them) . Vetoes have made our job extremely difficult since the pols don't like to revisit something. We gave you this, now you want that, you ungrateful bints.

The veto system was introduced partially because in Oz the mother was
being
given the same rights to identifying info as the adopted adult upon
turning 18 and primarily adopters opposing this (members of the APA
and APPG (NCFA affiliated))felt out of control. It was a peace maker.
The decision was made to introduce a veto system to prevent a small
minority from holding the majority of those who did want identifying
info and/or contact hostage. Unfortunately more adoptees than mothers
place vetoes. They are usually not quite 18 when they lodge it.

Di
Unfortunatley, in the US, the politics of grievance haven't seeped up into the privildge classes. Marley

Robin Harritt

01-22-2004, 08:20 AM

in article nmqv001tp98hg2jpaqpcts3sb40u9e0jgs@4ax.com, Jackie at
forgetit@me.com wrote on 22/1/04 3:25 pm:
On Wed, 21 Jan 2004 22:57:10 -0700 (MST), badaii@webtv.net (Windforest) wrote: Re: Bill Pierce? Confirmed Group: alt.adoption Date: Sun, Jan 18, 2004, 9:49am (MST-1) From: woodlark-99@newsguy.com (pb...) On Sun, 18 Jan 2004 10:39:28 -0500, Jackie <forgetit@me.com> writes: On Sat, 17 Jan 2004 11:27:57 -0800, pb... <woodlark-99@newsguy.com> wrote: On Sat, 17 Jan 2004 09:17:55 -0500, Jackie <forgetit@me.com> writes: On Fri, 16 Jan 2004 18:46:59 -0000, "helicon" <helicon@eircom.net> wrote: Di wrote.. He did indeed. Like all shrewd politicians he declawed his opponents by befriending them. Then played them like a fiddle. And won. That's not true. IMHO He befriended me.. Wrote to me private.. I tried to discuss opening up adoption and he cut me off cold.. Jackie I've no valid reason to doubt your word on this, Jackie...but it does seem a bit lopsided -- considering your current stand that adoptees *must* respect their birth parent(s), regardless of any circumstance, mitigating or otherwise. Was Pierce aware of your feelings on that issue? Are you aware of my feelings on this issue? Jackie Only what you've written many times over. pb... Then you need to read for comprehension patty. Because I don't see that you ARE aware of jackie's feelings on this. I SEE that you are aware of the groups perceptions of jackie's feelings. It isn't quite the same thing. What it is. is High School bull**** by so called adults. Now Roberta is joining the gang of bullying tactics. You all must be so proud of yourselves. Congrats and see ya Windforest Contact veto's give the power to the wrong people.. In reunion the power should reside *equally* with the two people reuniting.. Jackie

Two people? That's a very strange reunion that involves only two people. I
don't think I've ever been involved in such a reunion, what happened did
everyone else die and no one have any children at all?

Robin

Ron Morgan

01-22-2004, 08:48 AM

Dian

01-22-2004, 06:11 PM

"Ron Morgan" <rhyzome1@earthlink.net> wrote in message news:<_9TPb.21998$1e.16650@newsread2.news.pas.earthlink. net>... "Dian" <patrice68@bigpond.com.au> wrote in message news:c599139c.0401220819.68ee8af2@posting.google.c om... "Marley Greiner" <maddogmarley@worldnet.att.net> wrote in message news:<utIPb.84408$6y6.1698292@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net>... "Dian" <patrice68@bigpond.com.au> wrote in message news:c599139c.0401180803.6cbf274c@posting.google.c om... > Ron Morgan <rhyzome1@earthlink.net> wrote in message news:<40096501.5F3994FA@earthlink.net>... > > Dian wrote: It was the "good guys" who sold our rights away for the pleasure of some. I'm not sure where the first disclosure veto came from, but it was certainly not from NCFA or the industry. I hazard to tell you this but it was Australia. Most US and Canadian State have modelled their Bills and Acts on the NSW model. http://www.parliament.nsw.gov.au/Prod/Parlment/HansArt.nsf/0/ca256d11000bd3a a4a25644b00093be2?OpenDocument They've been around for at least 10 years, and most likely longer. Di, you don't understand the psychology or history of state legislators in the US. They don't care what legislatures in states contiguous to them have done or think about an issue, much less on what other countries do or have done. They don't care much about what past legislatures in their own state have done. Debates on open records bills in legislatures here are superficial, short, and brutish, long on platitudes and lean on substance, nobody goes beyond their chair to find out what other governments have done. As a matter of fact, if you suggested that they read Australia's laws on records access, they'd vote for the opposite in knee jerk opposition. They don't want help running their state from foreigners. They don't need human rights, they have their state constitutions...

But Ron don't they want to introduce vetoes into legislation, and
isn't that what you are opposing?

US adoption is a creature of state legislatures, and this fact more so than any other, retards progress in reforming or repealing adotion records laws, because regardless of party affiliation, a state legislator will not easily surrender power given to them by statute. And although this is a niggling power, the power to decide which adoptees if any get to access their identities, and although most legislators aren't even remotely aware that they possess this power, once its brought to their attention, they clench their jaws around it like mastiffs. The vast majority of state legislators are ignorant of adoption law in general, records access law and history in particular, even if they're lawyers. There is no specific curriculum in US law schools regarding adoption, lawyers can pass the state bar exams and hang a shingle without once brushing up against adoption records. I have sat in hearings in the legislature in California, where committee members can discuss the minutae of product liability law and statues as regards automotive warrantees and be astounded at the breadth of knowledge displayed. The next item on the agenda will be open records, and activists have to coach and instruct these same one-erudite lawmakers on the letter of the law as it exists. They don't even know what the law is, let alone what it ought to be. Ron
It's pretty much like that all over, Ron. None of them know adoption
law. Which is why our inquiry and its outcome caught them all by
surprise. Numerous politicians and lawyers have written on the topic
of adoption and don't even know what to call the mother who loses the
child. They refer to us as the adopting mothers of all things. An
example of it is in one of the URL's I just posted.

Di

A few years ago in Delaware, the AAC amended their pure open records bill at the last minute with a disclosure veto out of fear it wouldn't pass otherwise (they were *1-2* votes short out of committee with several days to go until the vote was taken. ) Don't get me started on this!. The contact veto came straight out of the TN open records movement because they felt they could not get unhindered access without it. The blame for these debacles and sell-outs needs to be placed at the feett of the people who did it: Tjhe Benedict Bastard adoption reformers, with their reunionist ideology and their warped belief that gradualism ("baby steps" is what they always call them) . Vetoes have made our job extremely difficult since the pols don't like to revisit something. We gave you this, now you want that, you ungrateful bints. The veto system was introduced partially because in Oz the mother was being given the same rights to identifying info as the adopted adult upon turning 18 and primarily adopters opposing this (members of the APA and APPG (NCFA affiliated))felt out of control. It was a peace maker. The decision was made to introduce a veto system to prevent a small minority from holding the majority of those who did want identifying info and/or contact hostage. Unfortunately more adoptees than mothers place vetoes. They are usually not quite 18 when they lodge it. Di Unfortunatley, in the US, the politics of grievance haven't seeped up into the privildge classes. Marley

Marley Greiner

01-22-2004, 09:27 PM

Ron Morgan

01-22-2004, 11:17 PM

"Dian" <patrice68@bigpond.com.au> wrote in message
news:c599139c.0401221811.4b4b1739@posting.google.c om... "Ron Morgan" <rhyzome1@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:<_9TPb.21998$1e.16650@newsread2.news.pas.earthlink. net>... "Dian" <patrice68@bigpond.com.au> wrote in message news:c599139c.0401220819.68ee8af2@posting.google.c om... "Marley Greiner" <maddogmarley@worldnet.att.net> wrote in message news:<utIPb.84408$6y6.1698292@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net>... > "Dian" <patrice68@bigpond.com.au> wrote in message > news:c599139c.0401180803.6cbf274c@posting.google.c om... > > Ron Morgan <rhyzome1@earthlink.net> wrote in message news:<40096501.5F3994FA@earthlink.net>... > > > Dian wrote: It was the "good guys" who sold our rights > away for the pleasure of some. I'm not sure where the first
disclosure veto > came from, but it was certainly not from NCFA or the industry. I hazard to tell you this but it was Australia. Most US and Canadian State have modelled their Bills and Acts on the NSW model.
http://www.parliament.nsw.gov.au/Prod/Parlment/HansArt.nsf/0/ca256d11000bd3a a4a25644b00093be2?OpenDocument They've been > around for at least 10 years, and most likely longer. Di, you don't understand the psychology or history of state legislators
in the US. They don't care what legislatures in states contiguous to them
have done or think about an issue, much less on what other countries do or
have done. They don't care much about what past legislatures in their own
state have done. Debates on open records bills in legislatures here are superficial, short, and brutish, long on platitudes and lean on
substance, nobody goes beyond their chair to find out what other governments have
done. As a matter of fact, if you suggested that they read Australia's laws on records access, they'd vote for the opposite in knee jerk opposition.
They don't want help running their state from foreigners. They don't need
human rights, they have their state constitutions... But Ron don't they want to introduce vetoes into legislation, and isn't that what you are opposing?

What has happened in some states is that a bill will be introduced to
provide records access, and legislators will counter with some sort of veto
provision, either contact or disclosure of information. In other states, as
Marley's mentioned, the adoption reform advocates will suggest veto
provisions as a compromise themselves. Legislatures as a rule haven't
introduced veto legislation without some sort of bill prodding them in the
direction of reform. Even the Uniform Adoption Act, the piece that NCFA got
drafted, is legislation that comes to state legislatures from the outside.

Ron US adoption is a creature of state legislatures, and this fact more so
than any other, retards progress in reforming or repealing adotion records
laws, because regardless of party affiliation, a state legislator will not
easily surrender power given to them by statute. And although this is a
niggling power, the power to decide which adoptees if any get to access their identities, and although most legislators aren't even remotely aware
that they possess this power, once its brought to their attention, they
clench their jaws around it like mastiffs. The vast majority of state legislators are ignorant of adoption law in general, records access law and history in particular, even if they're lawyers. There is no specific curriculum in US law schools regarding adoption, lawyers can pass the state bar exams and hang a shingle
without once brushing up against adoption records. I have sat in hearings in the legislature in California, where committee members can discuss the
minutae of product liability law and statues as regards automotive warrantees
and be astounded at the breadth of knowledge displayed. The next item on the
agenda will be open records, and activists have to coach and instruct these
same one-erudite lawmakers on the letter of the law as it exists. They don't
even know what the law is, let alone what it ought to be. Ron It's pretty much like that all over, Ron. None of them know adoption law. Which is why our inquiry and its outcome caught them all by surprise. Numerous politicians and lawyers have written on the topic of adoption and don't even know what to call the mother who loses the child. They refer to us as the adopting mothers of all things. An example of it is in one of the URL's I just posted. Di A few years ago in > Delaware, the AAC amended their pure open records bill at the last minute > with a disclosure veto out of fear it wouldn't pass otherwise (they
were > *1-2* votes short out of committee with several days to go until the vote > was taken. ) Don't get me started on this!. The contact veto came straight > out of the TN open records movement because they felt they could not
get > unhindered access without it. The blame for these debacles and sell-outs > needs to be placed at the feett of the people who did it: Tjhe Benedict > Bastard adoption reformers, with their reunionist ideology and their warped > belief that gradualism ("baby steps" is what they always call them)
.. > Vetoes have made our job extremely difficult since the pols don't
like to > revisit something. We gave you this, now you want that, you
ungrateful > bints. > The veto system was introduced partially because in Oz the mother was being given the same rights to identifying info as the adopted adult upon turning 18 and primarily adopters opposing this (members of the APA and APPG (NCFA affiliated))felt out of control. It was a peace maker. The decision was made to introduce a veto system to prevent a small minority from holding the majority of those who did want identifying info and/or contact hostage. Unfortunately more adoptees than mothers place vetoes. They are usually not quite 18 when they lodge it. Di > Unfortunatley, in the US, the politics of grievance haven't seeped
up into > the privildge classes. > > Marley

Marley Greiner

01-23-2004, 03:07 PM

"Dian" <patrice68@bigpond.com.au> wrote in message
news:c599139c.0401220819.68ee8af2@posting.google.c om... "Marley Greiner" <maddogmarley@worldnet.att.net> wrote in message
news:<utIPb.84408$6y6.1698292@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net>... "Dian" <patrice68@bigpond.com.au> wrote in message news:c599139c.0401180803.6cbf274c@posting.google.c om... Ron Morgan <rhyzome1@earthlink.net> wrote in message news:<40096501.5F3994FA@earthlink.net>... > Dian wrote: > > > > Pierce's power extended only to convincing legislators to
preserve a state run system that denies us our rights. > > > > And you see that as his ONLY power, Ron? That is ALL the power
he > > required to keep you down. > > Yup. That's all. It doesn't take much when your opponents think of themselves as victims, slaves and subalterns, internalizing the
oppression, being advised > by their leaders that they are unable to help themselves. > Bill did that to BN members? No, but there are approximately 6 million adopted persons in this
country today who won't get off their fat bottoms because they can't bear to do their own work, "dirty" their hands in politics, and enjoy wallowing in victim status. For every activist there are thousands of couch sitters
who want you to do their work for them. You can't even get them to thank
you for helping in their own searches. I can't tell you how many people
I've assisted in searching (gratis) that never even bother to say thanks.
The regulars here on aa are some of the most literature an active adoption people that I've ever met. Visit run-of-the-mill adoption lists.
They're full of angels, wounds, and whining, not to mention a total ignorance
of industry and industrial power. And they do NOT want to hear anything
that disturbs their sleep. Been there and done that too, Marley. I know the frustration only too well. But the bottom line is that we make the decision to put our money where our mouths are, on their behalf. No matter how big a membership is there is always only a few people who actually do the work it takes to bring about change. People genrally become complacent when they know their cause if being fought for by others. Though they'd be the first to scream blue murder if you threw in the towel.

In case you haven't noticed, I hate people. > Ultimately, the state oppresses us. > > > > > The State would not have oppressed you if your argument was solely > > between you and them. Bill thought he knew better than you and the > > State took his side. > > The state responds to power. Pierce, as an industrial lobbyist, had money power, adoptees have people power but thusfar haven't figured out
how to sustain and > grow it. Bill was sometimes compared to the gun and Israeli lobbies. And yet you befriended him. Even admired him for his power in opposing you. You learn from your enemies, not you friends. That's why you should never befriend them.

You would not believe some of the stuff I've done with "the enemy"--and I'm
not speaking of the adoption arena. I've been doing it since 1962. It's
very weird.
cut

I may have missed something in this thread . Bill never put forward
the veto idea. While mutual contact registers have been around since 1972, while records were still closed, the idea of using them to oppose open records belongs ot Bill, or at least his NCFA.

NCFAopposes state-run mutual consent registries and private reunion
registries like, ISRR. . The only registry they've ever "supported" (if
you could call it that) is a 5-signature registry on which the adopted
person, both bparents and both aparents sign-off on. Just how paternalistic
is that? I don't know what happens if somebody is dead. Tough, I guess.
NCFA never favours registries.. They fight them cats and dogs. Once they
are in place NCFA may note that they are there, but they don't support them. A mutual contact register is in and of itself a contact veto where only on the say so of both parties can either party access identifying information about each other. A mutual contact register places a veto on every adoptee until his mother sees fit to register her name allowing contact to be made.

Technically yes, but most people don't even know they exist. The States
certainly don't advertise them, staff them, and barely acknowledge them.
Just like the Putative Father Registries. They may be there on paper, but
in reality, they barely exist. They are basically useless--a sop to shut
people up. The Australia veto system holds no-one hostage to that level of control. to placate the frightened few it wa sdecided ot introduce a veto system where the individual mother or adoptee could lodge their own objection to contact. That said, in all states bar Qld the adopted person who receives a veto against contact still maintains all rights to access all of his identifying information upon turning 18. Which is what I understood was the primary concern of BN - the legal right to access their OBC's with reunions aka contact, being an incedental aspect of the primary goals.

We also oppose contact vetoes as in Tennessee where an adopted person could
be sent to jail and heavily fined for making contact with a biological
relative without the consent of bparents who have the "right" to place a de
facto restraining order on the adopted person to bar him or her from
contacting anybody the bparent sees fit to list, including those yet unborn. Every adoptee in Oz has that legal right, as I said, except Qld where the APPG aka NCFA was a powerful force and introduced vetoes against both contact AND IDENTIFYING INFORMATION. The APPG was and is still headed by adoptive parents who used the same tactics as the NCFA of putting up nmothers to be used as a smoke screen for their own personal agenda'a, which was to avoid telling their adopted children they were adopted and interferring in the adoptive family dynamics. They in turn scouted for a few nmothers who oppsed contact and used them as a front. That's what it was really all about.

No doubt There is/was a similar group in NZ. I've got some of their
newsletters. Did it ruin his career. Short of cannibalism, nothing ruins a
political career here any more. The only way they got their way at the 11th hour was to blackmail the then Premier of Qld by threatening to go public with the extra marital affair her was having at the time. It would have ruined his career, and so a few days before legislation was to pass the double barrelled veto system was passed and the whole fight against vetoes in Qld collapsed.

Oh do tell!!!! So it came out anyway? http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/other/nswlrc/rpt69/00132.html Impact of the Act on adoptive parents: conclusions 5.136 The majority of adoptive parents appear to be strongly opposed to the Act, especially insofar as it gives information rights to birth parents. A sizeable minority, on the other hand, support the Act, but are generally more enthusiastic about the granting of rights to adoptees than to birth parents. Most of the written submissions from adoptive parents opposed to the Act took a strong form. They said that the retrospective operation of the Act was a breach of the `contract' under which they accepted children for adoption, which they saw as guaranteeing that identifying information would not be released. They doubt the effectiveness of the contact veto, and advocate a law under which identifying information is only released where both parties have agreed in advance, or, at least, that the veto should be such as to prevent the release of identifying information. However it was clear that some adoptive parents, probably under-represented in the written submissions, took a more tentative and ambivalent view.

I don't know much about Oz. How easy would it be to search without ID
information held by courts, agencies, etc. Is there a paper trail as there
is here? Were their actually contracts with nmoms. (I doubt it) or
aparents (it wouldn't surprise me if some hotshots pols did it.) Vetoes came from the adoption reform movement itself, and we've had to pay for it ever since. Not actually true, Marley. Individual vetoes derived as a direct result of overcoming the mutual contact registry argument. Which is as I've mentioned a veto against every adoptee wanting his identifying info and having to wait until his mother also lists herself. If she never does he never gets his info. The veto system is directly linked to the NCFA policy on privacy.

There may be some correlation--I don't know. But it came from liberal
do-gooders and womb-crawlers who prefer the state to dole out rights rather
than for themselves to take them. I realizes that popular wisdom declares
that there is such a thing as natural rights ,but I don't believe that
particularly. Rights exist only when the state recognizes them and gives
them out . Otherwise anything anybody wants to claim as a right is a
fantasy.
It was the "good guys" who sold our rights away for the pleasure of some. I'm not sure where the first disclosure
veto came from, but it was certainly not from NCFA or the industry. I hazard to tell you this but it was Australia. Most US and Canadian State have modelled their Bills and Acts on the NSW model.
http://www.parliament.nsw.gov.au/Prod/Parlment/HansArt.nsf/0/ca256d11000bd3aa4a25644b00093be2?OpenDocument

I was talking about the US. I just can't remember and I'm too lame to try
to figure out. They've been around for at least 10 years, and most likely longer. 1988 South Australia. A few years ago in Delaware, the AAC amended their pure open records bill at the last
minute with a disclosure veto out of fear it wouldn't pass otherwise (they were *1-2* votes short out of committee with several days to go until the
vote was taken. ) Don't get me started on this!. The contact veto came
straight out of the TN open records movement because they felt they could not get unhindered access without it. The blame for these debacles and
sell-outs needs to be placed at the feett of the people who did it: Tjhe
Benedict Bastard adoption reformers, with their reunionist ideology and their
warped belief that gradualism ("baby steps" is what they always call them) . Vetoes have made our job extremely difficult since the pols don't like
to revisit something. We gave you this, now you want that, you ungrateful bints. The veto system was introduced partially because in Oz the mother was being given the same rights to identifying info as the adopted adult upon turning 18 and primarily adopters opposing this (members of the APA and APPG (NCFA affiliated))felt out of control. It was a peace maker. The decision was made to introduce a veto system to prevent a small minority from holding the majority of those who did want identifying info and/or contact hostage. Unfortunately more adoptees than mothers place vetoes. They are usually not quite 18 when they lodge it.

I don't understand that, but as I said, I hate people.

Marley Di Unfortunatley, in the US, the politics of grievance haven't seeped up
into the privildge classes. Marley

Kathy

01-23-2004, 03:40 PM

>Subject: Re: Bill Pierce? ConfirmedFrom: "Marley Greiner" maddogmarley@worldnet.att.netDate: 1/23/04 3:07 PM Pacific Standard TimeMessage-id: <YOhQb.95902$6y6.1921536@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net>"Dian" <patrice68@bigpond.com.au> wrote in messagenews:c599139c.0401220819.68ee8af2@posting.g oogle.com... "Marley Greiner" <maddogmarley@worldnet.att.net> wrote in messagenews:<utIPb.84408$6y6.1698292@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net>... "Dian" <patrice68@bigpond.com.au> wrote in message news:c599139c.0401180803.6cbf274c@posting.google.c om... > Ron Morgan <rhyzome1@earthlink.net> wrote in message news:<40096501.5F3994FA@earthlink.net>... > > Dian wrote: > > > > > > Pierce's power extended only to convincing legislators topreserve a state run system that denies us our rights. > > > > > > And you see that as his ONLY power, Ron? That is ALL the powerhe > > > required to keep you down. > > > > Yup. That's all. It doesn't take much when your opponents think of themselves as victims, slaves and subalterns, internalizing theoppression, being advised > > by their leaders that they are unable to help themselves. > > > Bill did that to BN members? No, but there are approximately 6 million adopted persons in thiscountry today who won't get off their fat bottoms because they can't bear to do their own work, "dirty" their hands in politics, and enjoy wallowing in victim status. For every activist there are thousands of couch sitterswho want you to do their work for them. You can't even get them to thankyou for helping in their own searches. I can't tell you how many peopleI've assisted in searching (gratis) that never even bother to say thanks.The regulars here on aa are some of the most literature an active adoption people that I've ever met. Visit run-of-the-mill adoption lists.They're full of angels, wounds, and whining, not to mention a total ignoranceof industry and industrial power. And they do NOT want to hear anythingthat disturbs their sleep. > Been there and done that too, Marley. I know the frustration only too well. But the bottom line is that we make the decision to put our money where our mouths are, on their behalf. No matter how big a membership is there is always only a few people who actually do the work it takes to bring about change. People genrally become complacent when they know their cause if being fought for by others. Though they'd be the first to scream blue murder if you threw in the towel.In case you haven't noticed, I hate people.

LOL.....NOoooo, really? And that is precisely why you should befriend those
that opporse you in your efforts to restore
OBC(s) to all adoptees. You'd make a great campaign mgr. for a President elect.

I can think of one or two that might need your help about now. ;-) Dr. Judy's
dh?

(snip)

Diane Welfare, "she describes the US market as a "$US1.4 billion business in
baby trafficking". ~~121603
http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2003/12/15/1071336884771.html

Marley Greiner

01-23-2004, 03:58 PM

"Kathy" <meagan787@aol.comsthesun> wrote in message
news:20040123184059.28505.00000761@mb-m01.aol.com...Subject: Re: Bill Pierce? ConfirmedFrom: "Marley Greiner" maddogmarley@worldnet.att.netDate: 1/23/04 3:07 PM Pacific Standard TimeMessage-id: <YOhQb.95902$6y6.1921536@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net>"Dian" <patrice68@bigpond.com.au> wrote in messagenews:c599139c.0401220819.68ee8af2@posting.g oogle.com... "Marley Greiner" <maddogmarley@worldnet.att.net> wrote in messagenews:<utIPb.84408$6y6.1698292@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net>... > "Dian" <patrice68@bigpond.com.au> wrote in message > news:c599139c.0401180803.6cbf274c@posting.google.c om... > > Ron Morgan <rhyzome1@earthlink.net> wrote in message > news:<40096501.5F3994FA@earthlink.net>... > > > Dian wrote: > > > > > > > > Pierce's power extended only to convincing legislators topreserve a > state run system that denies us our rights. > > > > > > > > And you see that as his ONLY power, Ron? That is ALL the
powerhe > > > > required to keep you down. > > > > > > Yup. That's all. It doesn't take much when your opponents think
of > themselves as victims, slaves and subalterns, internalizing theoppression, > being advised > > > by their leaders that they are unable to help themselves. > > > > > Bill did that to BN members? > > No, but there are approximately 6 million adopted persons in thiscountry > today who won't get off their fat bottoms because they can't bear to
do > their own work, "dirty" their hands in politics, and enjoy wallowing
in > victim status. For every activist there are thousands of couch
sitterswho > want you to do their work for them. You can't even get them to thankyou > for helping in their own searches. I can't tell you how many peopleI've > assisted in searching (gratis) that never even bother to say thanks.The > regulars here on aa are some of the most literature an active
adoption > people that I've ever met. Visit run-of-the-mill adoption lists.They're > full of angels, wounds, and whining, not to mention a total
ignoranceof > industry and industrial power. And they do NOT want to hear anythingthat > disturbs their sleep. > > Been there and done that too, Marley. I know the frustration only too well. But the bottom line is that we make the decision to put our money where our mouths are, on their behalf. No matter how big a membership is there is always only a few people who actually do the work it takes to bring about change. People genrally become complacent when they know their cause if being fought for by others. Though they'd be the first to scream blue murder if you threw in the towel.In case you haven't noticed, I hate people. LOL.....NOoooo, really? And that is precisely why you should befriend
those that opporse you in your efforts to restore OBC(s) to all adoptees. You'd make a great campaign mgr. for a President
elect. I can think of one or two that might need your help about now. ;-) Dr.
Judy's dh? (snip)

Yeah, what happened? I'm a Wes Clark kinda guy myself.

Marley Diane Welfare, "she describes the US market as a "$US1.4 billion business
in baby trafficking". ~~121603 http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2003/12/15/1071336884771.html

Kathy

01-23-2004, 04:56 PM

>Subject: Re: Bill Pierce? ConfirmedFrom: "Marley Greiner" maddogmarley@worldnet.att.netDate: 1/23/04 3:58 PM Pacific Standard TimeMessage-id: <OyiQb.96137$6y6.1925416@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net>"Kathy" <meagan787@aol.comsthesun> wrote in messagenews:20040123184059.28505.00000761@mb-m01.aol.com...Subject: Re: Bill Pierce? ConfirmedFrom: "Marley Greiner" maddogmarley@worldnet.att.netDate: 1/23/04 3:07 PM Pacific Standard TimeMessage-id: <YOhQb.95902$6y6.1921536@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net>"Dian" <patrice68@bigpond.com.au> wrote in messagenews:c599139c.0401220819.68ee8af2@posting.g oogle.com...> "Marley Greiner" <maddogmarley@worldnet.att.net> wrote in messagenews:<utIPb.84408$6y6.1698292@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net>...> > "Dian" <patrice68@bigpond.com.au> wrote in message> > news:c599139c.0401180803.6cbf274c@posting.google.c om...> > > Ron Morgan <rhyzome1@earthlink.net> wrote in message> > news:<40096501.5F3994FA@earthlink.net>...> > > > Dian wrote:> > > >> > > > > > Pierce's power extended only to convincing legislators topreserve a> > state run system that denies us our rights.> > > > >> > > > > And you see that as his ONLY power, Ron? That is ALL thepowerhe> > > > > required to keep you down.> > > >> > > > Yup. That's all. It doesn't take much when your opponents thinkof> > themselves as victims, slaves and subalterns, internalizing theoppression,> > being advised> > > > by their leaders that they are unable to help themselves.> > > >> > > Bill did that to BN members?> >> > No, but there are approximately 6 million adopted persons in thiscountry> > today who won't get off their fat bottoms because they can't bear todo> > their own work, "dirty" their hands in politics, and enjoy wallowingin> > victim status. For every activist there are thousands of couchsitterswho> > want you to do their work for them. You can't even get them to thankyou> > for helping in their own searches. I can't tell you how many peopleI've> > assisted in searching (gratis) that never even bother to say thanks.The> > regulars here on aa are some of the most literature an activeadoption> > people that I've ever met. Visit run-of-the-mill adoption lists.They're> > full of angels, wounds, and whining, not to mention a totalignoranceof> > industry and industrial power. And they do NOT want to hear anythingthat> > disturbs their sleep.> > >>> Been there and done that too, Marley. I know the frustration only too> well. But the bottom line is that we make the decision to put our> money where our mouths are, on their behalf. No matter how big a> membership is there is always only a few people who actually do the> work it takes to bring about change. People genrally become complacent> when they know their cause if being fought for by others. Though> they'd be the first to scream blue murder if you threw in the towel.In case you haven't noticed, I hate people. LOL.....NOoooo, really? And that is precisely why you should befriendthose that opporse you in your efforts to restore OBC(s) to all adoptees. You'd make a great campaign mgr. for a Presidentelect. I can think of one or two that might need your help about now. ;-) Dr.Judy's dh? (snip)Yeah, what happened? I'm a Wes Clark kinda guy myself.Marley

Yeah riiight. ;-)

What happened? I thought you'd be the perfect lady to give Dean some much
needed (ehem), voice lessons.

Diane Welfare, "she describes the US market as a "$US1.4 billion business in
baby trafficking". ~~121603
http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2003/12/15/1071336884771.html

01-24-2004, 07:59 AM

In article <OyiQb.96137$6y6.1925416@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net>,
"Marley Greiner" <maddogmarley@worldnet.att.net> writes:
In case you haven't noticed, I hate people. LOL.....NOoooo, really? And that is precisely why you should befriendthose that opporse you in your efforts to restore OBC(s) to all adoptees. You'd make a great campaign mgr. for a Presidentelect. I can think of one or two that might need your help about now. ;-) Dr.Judy's dh? (snip)Yeah, what happened? I'm a Wes Clark kinda guy myself.Marley

The first thing Clark needs is another person on makeup. He looked like George
Hamilton the other night.

Kathy may be referring to Dean, whose populist pitch (ending with a poorly done
'yee-haw') apparently didn't sit well with many. I'm amazed at the response.
It was sedate compared to what I've seen out of Wellstone and Harkin, among
others.

I'm already settling in to weather GWB: The Sequel, myself.

J.

Reply to jmhjmd at aol.

01-24-2004, 07:59 AM

In article <YOhQb.95902$6y6.1921536@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net>,
"Marley Greiner" <maddogmarley@worldnet.att.net> writes:

<snip>
NCFAopposes state-run mutual consent registries and private reunionregistries like, ISRR. . The only registry they've ever "supported" (ifyou could call it that) is a 5-signature registry on which the adoptedperson, both bparents and both aparents sign-off on. Just how paternalisticis that? I don't know what happens if somebody is dead. Tough, I guess.NCFA never favours registries.. They fight them cats and dogs. Once theyare in place NCFA may note that they are there, but they don't support them.

Clearly they know better what's best for people, Marley. Seriously, has this
5-signature idea ever gotten off the ground anywhere?

<snip>
The veto system was introduced partially because in Oz the mother was being given the same rights to identifying info as the adopted adult upon turning 18 and primarily adopters opposing this (members of the APA and APPG (NCFA affiliated))felt out of control. It was a peace maker. The decision was made to introduce a veto system to prevent a small minority from holding the majority of those who did want identifying info and/or contact hostage. Unfortunately more adoptees than mothers place vetoes. They are usually not quite 18 when they lodge it.I don't understand that, but as I said, I hate people.

Like a flower hates the sun, eh?

J.
Marley

Reply to jmhjmd at aol.

Marley Greiner

01-24-2004, 08:10 AM

"J." <jmdjmh@aol.compostible> wrote in message
news:20040124105958.23171.00003639@mb-m05.aol.com... In article <YOhQb.95902$6y6.1921536@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net>, "Marley Greiner" <maddogmarley@worldnet.att.net> writes: <snip>NCFAopposes state-run mutual consent registries and private reunionregistries like, ISRR. . The only registry they've ever "supported" (ifyou could call it that) is a 5-signature registry on which the adoptedperson, both bparents and both aparents sign-off on. Just how
paternalisticis that? I don't know what happens if somebody is dead. Tough, I
guess.NCFA never favours registries.. They fight them cats and dogs. Once theyare in place NCFA may note that they are there, but they don't support
them. Clearly they know better what's best for people, Marley. Seriously, has
this 5-signature idea ever gotten off the ground anywhere?

I think NCFA dropped that zany idea some time back. (I think I have a copy
of their model law or form on that). Years ago in Missouri, adult adoptees
were required to have their aparents written consent to access information,
but I'm not sure if that's still in effect. <snip> The veto system was introduced partially because in Oz the mother was being given the same rights to identifying info as the adopted adult upon turning 18 and primarily adopters opposing this (members of the APA and APPG (NCFA affiliated))felt out of control. It was a peace maker. The decision was made to introduce a veto system to prevent a small minority from holding the majority of those who did want identifying info and/or contact hostage. Unfortunately more adoptees than mothers place vetoes. They are usually not quite 18 when they lodge it.I don't understand that, but as I said, I hate people. Like a flower hates the sun, eh?

Ah, you think I exagerrate?! J.

Marley Reply to jmhjmd at aol.

01-24-2004, 09:46 AM

In article <9OwQb.100580$6y6.2006078@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net>,
"Marley Greiner" <maddogmarley@worldnet.att.net> writes:
"J." <jmdjmh@aol.compostible> wrote in messagenews:20040124105958.23171.00003639@mb-m05.aol.com... In article <YOhQb.95902$6y6.1921536@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net>, "Marley Greiner" <maddogmarley@worldnet.att.net> writes: <snip>NCFAopposes state-run mutual consent registries and private reunionregistries like, ISRR. . The only registry they've ever "supported" (ifyou could call it that) is a 5-signature registry on which the adoptedperson, both bparents and both aparents sign-off on. Just howpaternalisticis that? I don't know what happens if somebody is dead. Tough, Iguess.NCFA never favours registries.. They fight them cats and dogs. Once theyare in place NCFA may note that they are there, but they don't supportthem. Clearly they know better what's best for people, Marley. Seriously, hasthis 5-signature idea ever gotten off the ground anywhere?I think NCFA dropped that zany idea some time back. (I think I have a copyof their model law or form on that). Years ago in Missouri, adult adopteeswere required to have their aparents written consent to access information,but I'm not sure if that's still in effect.

I'll check that out when I have the time. Completely bizarre, if so.

<snip>> The veto system was introduced partially because in Oz the mother was> being> given the same rights to identifying info as the adopted adult upon> turning 18 and primarily adopters opposing this (members of the APA> and APPG (NCFA affiliated))felt out of control. It was a peace maker.> The decision was made to introduce a veto system to prevent a small> minority from holding the majority of those who did want identifying> info and/or contact hostage. Unfortunately more adoptees than mothers> place vetoes. They are usually not quite 18 when they lodge it.I don't understand that, but as I said, I hate people. Like a flower hates the sun, eh?Ah, you think I exagerrate?!

I think you're a complete fraud on this point, Marley. <g>

J.

Reply to jmhjmd at aol.

Marley Greiner

01-24-2004, 12:51 PM

"J." <jmdjmh@aol.compostible> wrote in message
news:20040124124618.02537.00002616@mb-m23.aol.com... In article <9OwQb.100580$6y6.2006078@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net>, "Marley Greiner" <maddogmarley@worldnet.att.net> writes:"J." <jmdjmh@aol.compostible> wrote in messagenews:20040124105958.23171.00003639@mb-m05.aol.com... In article
<YOhQb.95902$6y6.1921536@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net>, "Marley Greiner" <maddogmarley@worldnet.att.net> writes: <snip> >NCFAopposes state-run mutual consent registries and private reunion >registries like, ISRR. . The only registry they've ever "supported"
(if >you could call it that) is a 5-signature registry on which the adopted >person, both bparents and both aparents sign-off on. Just howpaternalistic >is that? I don't know what happens if somebody is dead. Tough, Iguess. >NCFA never favours registries.. They fight them cats and dogs. Once
they >are in place NCFA may note that they are there, but they don't supportthem. Clearly they know better what's best for people, Marley. Seriously,
hasthis 5-signature idea ever gotten off the ground anywhere?I think NCFA dropped that zany idea some time back. (I think I have a
copyof their model law or form on that). Years ago in Missouri, adult
adopteeswere required to have their aparents written consent to access
information,but I'm not sure if that's still in effect. I'll check that out when I have the time. Completely bizarre, if so. <snip> >> The veto system was introduced partially because in Oz the mother
was >> being >> given the same rights to identifying info as the adopted adult upon >> turning 18 and primarily adopters opposing this (members of the APA >> and APPG (NCFA affiliated))felt out of control. It was a peace
maker. >> The decision was made to introduce a veto system to prevent a small >> minority from holding the majority of those who did want identifying >> info and/or contact hostage. Unfortunately more adoptees than
mothers >> place vetoes. They are usually not quite 18 when they lodge it. > >I don't understand that, but as I said, I hate people. Like a flower hates the sun, eh?Ah, you think I exagerrate?! I think you're a complete fraud on this point, Marley. <g>

Well, I do like you Jim. You're an exception!

Marley J. Reply to jmhjmd at aol.