But if this is supposed to be about the good of the children--as many here seem to say--then wouldn't it be nice if those American kids had a chance to live in a real home, even if only for a few years until their real parents take them back?
Or is this adoption thing not about helping children after all?
Do you have children? Do you know anyone who has adopted a child in the States, or from anywhere else? Do you ever wonder why you feel the way you do?
Are you intentionally trying to be unreasonable?
People have recognized throughout that adoption is both for the benefit of the child and the parents who adopt. So, yes, permanence is an important factor for US citizens who adopt at least partially for their own benefit. Yet you want to take that benefit away from them even though you have yet to answer the question as to why international adoptions should be penalized in the first place. It's clearly not just about population control as you advocate for procreation. So what is it? Why don't you answer the question?
Adoption is a benefit that benefits both the family and the child. That fact that both are true does not take away from the other.
Uprooting them is worse. You think the kids can just pick up and move from the only parents they've known?