In my continuing efforts to expose hidden agendas, to pull back the blanket and show the ugly face hiding under covers of "caring" or "research" or "information", I'm following along on the post I wrote a couple of days ago that did just that.

A couple of people left comments disagreeing with my assessment. A "law review article", according to one comment, " ... need not be written without opinions, observations or even a smattering of inside information."

Dandy. It could, however, refrain from the spurious, the emotive and the insulting.

Over the last couple of days, I've been coming across another article that appears to be getting picked up here and there. I ignored it at first, it being just too, too trashy-ignorant-to-stupid-simplistic and total rubbish to do anything but ignore.

Tossing around intentional slams like, "adoption is racist", "cultural genocide", "Madonna was criticized and Angelina confounds", "so-called orphans" and blah, blah, blah, this piece was so obviously written not to educate, but to smear, that I allowed myself to think that no one of reasonable intelligence would give it any attention at all.

Today, when I came across the piece AGAIN in exactly the same form ... predigested and not needing regurgitation ... it dawned on me that there's been a concerted effort to pass this trash from site to site from someone who figures there's a future in slurring if it's done often enough.

Sure enough.

This time, though, there's no shilly-shallying, no watermarks or law school hoo-has. This time it's Origins.

Not familiar with Origins? Then you must be new to the adoption world.

Origins is made up primarily of birth mothers. Angry, resentful ... hateful, I would not be going out on a limb to say ... birth mothers, who detest everything about adoption, are none too fond of adoptive parents (meaning they'd like to see all of us take a short drop and a sudden stop), and who'll bite the lips off any adoptee who doesn't completely and totally agree that their life has been a living hell because they were adopted.

But don't take my word for it. For an overview, check out the alt.adoption group and search there for all posts about Origins, or read anywhere else Origins comes up against reasonable people making valid points.

As for this article, there's a place on the site I saw today that allows for contact with the editor of the publication. I strongly suggest people do exactly that, although the registration process is a bit of a pain. This stuff shouldn't go without comment.