Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Chinese baby girls sold for adoption(extra baby seized for failure to pay fine)
UPI ^ | 07/02/09

Posted on 07/04/2009 7:26:46 AM PDT by TigerLikesRooster

Chinese baby girls sold for adoption

Published: July 2, 2009 at 11:55 PM

As many as 80 newborn baby girls from China's southwest Guizhou Province were sold for adoption by foreign parents since 2001, a newspaper probe found.

China Daily, quoting the Southern Metropolis News, said the babies were removed from their families by local officials in the province's Zhenyuan county. Most of them were handed over to foreign adoptive parents as orphans at a price of $3,000 each.

The report said one poor farming couple, who are among the affected 80 families, had to hand over their fifth baby, a girl, to local family planning officials because they couldn't pay the appropriate fine under China's two-child policy.

The report said the husband, like other fathers in the county, wanted and got a boy after three girls. The fifth baby was again a girl as the family struggled to support all five on an annual income of about $732.

(Excerpt) Read more at upi.com ...


TOPICS: Extended News; Foreign Affairs; Government; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: adoption; china; fine; twochildpolicy
I hope this won't inspire Barry to impose two child quota on those "bitter bible-holding gun-loving" whities.
1 posted on 07/04/2009 7:26:47 AM PDT by TigerLikesRooster
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: TigerLikesRooster; maui_hawaii; Jeff Head; Tainan; hedgetrimmer; Unam Sanctam; taxesareforever; ...

Ping!


2 posted on 07/04/2009 7:27:27 AM PDT by TigerLikesRooster (LUV DIC -- L,U,V-shaped recession, Depression, Inflation, Collapse)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TigerLikesRooster
Barry to impose two child quota on those "bitter bible-holding gun-loving" whities.

We basically impose this quota on ourselves. The average birthrate is 1.6 per family.

The less fortunate have more children because they are rewarded by our government.

3 posted on 07/04/2009 7:33:14 AM PDT by VicVega (Join Jihad, get captured by the US and resettled in the best places in the world. I love the USA)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TigerLikesRooster

Another for the “Chinese are Barbarians” file.


4 posted on 07/04/2009 7:38:59 AM PDT by farmer18th (If you preach "too big to let fail," you're also preaching "too small to let succeed.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TigerLikesRooster

>>As many as 80 newborn baby girls from China’s southwest Guizhou Province were sold for adoption by foreign parents since 2001<<

How did foreign parents get Chinese babies to sell?


5 posted on 07/04/2009 7:40:35 AM PDT by freedumb2003 (Communism comes to America: 1/20/2009. Keep your powder dry, folks. Sic semper tyrannis)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TigerLikesRooster

Well......thank leftists we have abortion,so we won’t needlessly suffer this kind of atrocity! (/sarc,big time)


6 posted on 07/04/2009 7:41:34 AM PDT by gimme1ibertee (Time to CLEAN HOUSE (AND Senate!!!) Kick their butts to the curb!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: VicVega
The less fortunate have more children because they are rewarded by our government.

Yep...you nailed it!
7 posted on 07/04/2009 7:42:29 AM PDT by gimme1ibertee (Time to CLEAN HOUSE (AND Senate!!!) Kick their butts to the curb!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: TigerLikesRooster
I have a bad feeling that Barry is intentionally causing racial unrest in hopes of an uprising so he and the Democrat/Socialist/Progressive/Marxist/Fascists can install Martial Law and finally take over.

I only wonder this because they are treating as terrorists those that have served in our Military.

8 posted on 07/04/2009 7:42:36 AM PDT by Dustbunny ("Government does not solve problems; it subsidizes them. " Ronald Reagan)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Dustbunny
Martial law? Let him impose one. He will find out how little territory he can actually control.
9 posted on 07/04/2009 7:48:07 AM PDT by TigerLikesRooster (LUV DIC -- L,U,V-shaped recession, Depression, Inflation, Collapse)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: VicVega

“The less fortunate have more children because they are rewarded by our government.”

We have four boys that are healthy, happy and sound. We are not well off financially by any means and we DO NOT rely on any welfare, so there are exceptions.


10 posted on 07/04/2009 7:48:58 AM PDT by mkcc30 ("Millions for defense, but not one cent for tribute.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: VicVega; djsherin

In other words, the American government imposes a fine on those who do not have children...they must pay a surcharge, a fee, for the same income as those with kids.

Such tax policies are a way for the government to say, “Do as we say or we’ll fine you.”

The American people have gotten used to a Federal income tax (long ago), and now that they are lulled into deductions, credits, etc., look for this technique of government control to increase.


11 posted on 07/04/2009 7:54:59 AM PDT by Gondring (Paul Revere would have been flamed as a naysayer troll and told to go back to Boston.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: mkcc30
We have four boys that are healthy, happy and sound. We are not well off financially by any means and we DO NOT rely on any welfare, so there are exceptions.

My apology for not being clear and no disrespect meant to working families like yourself.

I am trying to be PC.

Maybe I should have wrote, inner city, women having multiple children of different fathers are rewarded and encouraged.

Being PC sucks.

Just too bad more "traditional" families don't have more children.

12 posted on 07/04/2009 7:55:12 AM PDT by VicVega (Join Jihad, get captured by the US and resettled in the best places in the world. I love the USA)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Gondring
"Federal income tax (long ago), and now that they are lulled into deductions, credits, etc., look for this technique of government control to increase."

No kidding. Foaming at the mouth for my next tax break. A real tax break would be to eliminate the personal income tax all together.

And you are correct, more taxes, fees and VAT's to come.

13 posted on 07/04/2009 7:59:14 AM PDT by VicVega (Join Jihad, get captured by the US and resettled in the best places in the world. I love the USA)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: VicVega

I understood your meaning, absolutely no offense taken. A working family does indeed have no reason to be offended.
I have witnessed from various places I lived the “families” you speak of and have even overheard the conversations about having more children so they could receive more welfare. Sadly there are generations of these people.


14 posted on 07/04/2009 8:04:32 AM PDT by mkcc30 ("Millions for defense, but not one cent for tribute.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: VicVega

Those little Chinese girls with US passports and a good education will be highly sought after by millionaires in China.


15 posted on 07/04/2009 8:04:37 AM PDT by Oldexpat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: gimme1ibertee
The less fortunate have more children because they are rewarded by our government.

Perhaps very partially true. Many have more children because they are intent only on having sex and not smart enough to use birth control effectively. The men are intent on making babies and, not having real jobs, don't even consider it part of their responsibility to take care of them. That's womens work.

16 posted on 07/04/2009 8:06:21 AM PDT by Jack Black
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: mkcc30

I am so glad you are principled and pay your full share of taxes by not claiming that tax exemption government reward for having children!

Nearly all so-called “conservatives” on FR show their true liberal colors by supporting such governmental control measures, rather than standing up and saying that taxing people extra for not having children, a mortgage, etc., is unAmerican.


17 posted on 07/04/2009 8:06:26 AM PDT by Gondring (Paul Revere would have been flamed as a naysayer troll and told to go back to Boston.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Oldexpat
Those little Chinese girls with US passports and a good education will be highly sought after by millionaires in China.

No doubt. In the quest to have sons, China will end up with a 10 to 1 ratio of men to women.

20 years from now you could end up with a big homosexual society. Otherwise come the US and meet the girls, now women that were put up for adoption.

18 posted on 07/04/2009 8:14:50 AM PDT by VicVega (Join Jihad, get captured by the US and resettled in the best places in the world. I love the USA)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: VicVega
Most Americans are unaware that there was no Federal personal income tax 100 years ago.
19 posted on 07/04/2009 8:16:28 AM PDT by Gondring (Paul Revere would have been flamed as a naysayer troll and told to go back to Boston.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Gondring
So a tax exemption should be refused for children?

Are they not also American citizens or are they just non abortions gone wrong and should be left to die as ObaMao would have it?

Do you take your exemption?

I don't see your reasoning that only some people should have exemptions and other not. Should we have to reach a certain age to have an exemption?

These people that have children and pay taxes are the working people!

20 posted on 07/04/2009 8:22:39 AM PDT by mckenzie7 (TOTUS = PONZI)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Gondring

Gondring, if every child is a tax exemption, including yourself as a child, I don’t see that unfairness. Rich, poor, any race, any disability, any birth order - each one is an exemption? Then I see that as fair.

I don’t see the income tax as fair, to be clear. But taking a fair exemption should not be ridiculed.

I am in about a 22% tax bracket. Should I pay 33% by your theory?

We are going to have at least $4,000 in medical deductions this year. Should I not take them, to be fair?


21 posted on 07/04/2009 8:31:10 AM PDT by Marie2 (The second mouse gets the cheese.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Gondring

If you don’t like your tax bill then freakin’ figure out exemptions or deductions for yourself. Taxes as they are applied are NOT patriotic anyway.
I guarantee you I am FAR more patriotic and conservative than your bitter self will ever be. Your little attack on me personally is ridiculously uncalled for as you do not know me or my family and the facts that we donate 20% of our income to charities and our Church or the fact that our taxes are itemized and our bigger refund is from that and not our exemptions.
Think before you open your self-righteous yap next time, got it.


22 posted on 07/04/2009 8:38:46 AM PDT by mkcc30 ("Millions for defense, but not one cent for tribute.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: mckenzie7
My daughter came from China in 2002 and price was $3,000 along with many other fees. She is now 7 going on 40 and "oh my" the drama in the lives of little girls.

It breaks my heart to think of her in the orphanage, no family and prospects for a poor life. We visited the place one day and there were so many girls there, that you wanted to throw one under each arm and bring them home.

23 posted on 07/04/2009 8:42:09 AM PDT by Taylor42
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Taylor42
Congratulations on your little daughter!

I remember seeing a special on TV where little abandoned babies were kept in an orphanage, with a minimum of human interaction. It was so sad!

I applaud you for your humanity and may God continue to bless you and your family!

24 posted on 07/04/2009 8:46:06 AM PDT by mckenzie7 (TOTUS = PONZI)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: Taylor42
My daughter came from China in 2002 and price was $3,000......

______________________________________

Very disturbing choice of words.

25 posted on 07/04/2009 8:53:21 AM PDT by wtc911 ("How you gonna get back down that hill?")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: wtc911
You are critical of her/his choice of words when they speak the truth. You would prefer euphemisms?
26 posted on 07/04/2009 8:55:24 AM PDT by ladyjane
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: wtc911

I agree. Babies don’t have a price. As an adoptive mother myself, I paid fees for various services, but I didn’t “buy” my children for a price.


27 posted on 07/04/2009 8:56:38 AM PDT by Texas_shutterbug (e)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: ladyjane

I am critical of the ‘parent’ viewing the child as a purchase with a price tag.


28 posted on 07/04/2009 8:57:58 AM PDT by wtc911 ("How you gonna get back down that hill?")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: Texas_shutterbug
As an adoptive mother myself, I paid fees for various services, but I didn’t “buy” my children for a price.

____________________________

Exactly.

29 posted on 07/04/2009 8:58:58 AM PDT by wtc911 ("How you gonna get back down that hill?")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: Gondring

What are you saying? Are you criticizing those who have children? Sure sounds like it.


30 posted on 07/04/2009 9:00:05 AM PDT by Theo (Global warming "scientists." Pro-evolution "scientists." They're both wrong.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: wtc911; Taylor42

I don’t think it’s a “very disturbing choice of words” at all.

The cost of bringing the baby “home” was $3,000.

Get over your holier-than-thou antagonism toward adoption.

FWIW, the adoption process brings out the crappiest jerks in the world, worse than used car salesmen. The bureaucrats and lawyers who prolong the process so they can profit are absolutely jerks who I pray will end up in hell.

And, yes, money is expended to bring the child home. That is a tragedy, but that is the fact of the matter.


31 posted on 07/04/2009 9:03:02 AM PDT by Theo (Global warming "scientists." Pro-evolution "scientists." They're both wrong.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: Gondring

Thanks to Wilson and a few traitor american congressmen.


32 posted on 07/04/2009 9:03:44 AM PDT by VicVega (Join Jihad, get captured by the US and resettled in the best places in the world. I love the USA)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: Theo
Get over your holier-than-thou antagonism toward adoption

__________________________________

Antagonism toward adoption? You assume too much.

33 posted on 07/04/2009 9:24:42 AM PDT by wtc911 ("How you gonna get back down that hill?")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: Taylor42

Ah, just ignore those self-righteous wordsmiths who want to jump in your face for even talking about adoption fees being equated with “buying” a child. They rank right down there with the “Why didn’t you adopt in America” crowd- which have usually adopted no one, no where

People who give birth pay the doctor and hospital for their services, we paid the adoption agency.

BTW, We brought home two (both from Russia, one is half Chinese)- we did throw an extra one under our arms but still have photos and sadness from those left behind

Mazel Tov


34 posted on 07/04/2009 10:13:13 AM PDT by silverleaf ("Never forget that everything Hitler did in Germany was legal ( Martin Luther King))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: wtc911
Get over it.

The adoption process was full of fees and other assorted charges. When I picked her up from the orphanage it was understood that there would be a $3000 fee. They wanted crisp new $100 bills. The fee was to cover the costs the government had paid for her care to that time.

Yeah, right!

I don't know where the money when, but I don't think it went to the care of the girls.

If you choose to think of it as "buying" a little girl then mores the pity for you!

35 posted on 07/04/2009 10:15:40 AM PDT by Taylor42
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: mkcc30

Attack? I evidently misunderstood your reply. I thought you were saying you were not taking advantage of government rewards for having more children.


36 posted on 07/04/2009 10:27:10 AM PDT by Gondring (Paul Revere would have been flamed as a naysayer troll and told to go back to Boston.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: Theo; mkcc30; Marie2; mckenzie7
What are you saying? Are you criticizing those who have children? Sure sounds like it.

Where do you get that idea?

I'm criticizing a governmental system that is allowed to fine you for not acting the way it wants, even if both paths are legal. That's merely a disguised version of tyrrany.

Don't believe it? Think it's hyperbole? Consider the following...

Take two couples with identical incomes, and one has a child. The other couple, whether from life choice or infertility or whatever, will be penalized and have to pay higher taxes than the other.

If they try to be treated equitably and pay the same rate as the other couple, they can be imprisoned at gunpoint.

How is that not the government directing personal decisions at gunpoint? And will you support it if (or when) Congress and Obama pass a bill saying that your taxes will be higher than those who choose to "attend training sessions on the importance of community involvement" because they get a "deduction" for their activity?

The point is not that FReepers should not take these deductions--the point is that FReepers should be fighting against their very existence. That includes the whole "itemization" scam, too.

37 posted on 07/04/2009 10:29:34 AM PDT by Gondring (Paul Revere would have been flamed as a naysayer troll and told to go back to Boston.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: Marie2

Thank you for your polite reply.

I hope that my explanation I already pinged you on has answered the questions, but if not, please let me know.


38 posted on 07/04/2009 10:34:52 AM PDT by Gondring (Paul Revere would have been flamed as a naysayer troll and told to go back to Boston.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: Taylor42
Congratulations on your decision to adopt. We adopted 3 babies but it was before Roe v Wade when it was easier to do.
39 posted on 07/04/2009 10:38:03 AM PDT by Ditter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: VicVega

Ronald W. Reagan
George W. Bush

Who woulda guessed that the “Wilson” would be the former?


40 posted on 07/04/2009 11:24:24 AM PDT by Gondring (Paul Revere would have been flamed as a naysayer troll and told to go back to Boston.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: Taylor42

It is you who referred to the ‘price’ you paid not I 9only that which can be bought has a price). You created the impression that you bought the child, get over it yourself.


41 posted on 07/04/2009 11:42:55 AM PDT by wtc911 ("How you gonna get back down that hill?")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: Gondring

My objection to your comment was the inference that I am somehow by choice liberal.
I think we can both agree that our tax system is indeed a travesty and NOT constitutional by any stretch of the imagination. I do more than rant and rave about it though as I have joined many organizations that are in protest of our almost draconian system. I like many others hope that someday ‘We The People’ can change things without force and that will be by continually dogging the powers that be and hopefully getting like-minded individuals elected.
I am not arguing the fact that the system is screwed up but do not infer in some way that I am suckling at the government teat.
The government gives me NOTHING as taxes we pay far exceed the federal and state income taxes, there is property, sales, gas etc. etc. etc.
I do not look at it as “paying my fair share”, fair share for what?...government pay increases...wasted pork barrel spending..As far as I am concerned the less they keep the less damage the can do with it.
We feel giving to worthy causes mostly on a local level is the true definition of charity and “welfare” as it were. So you better believe that what I give to my Church or a local food pantry or a children’s fund (all non-governmental of course) we will declare come (t)AX time.


42 posted on 07/04/2009 11:53:18 AM PDT by mkcc30 ("Millions for defense, but not one cent for tribute.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: Gondring

I apologize as I thought your first line was a sarcasctic jab?

Let us just agree that our tax system needs changing in a profound way.


43 posted on 07/04/2009 11:59:42 AM PDT by mkcc30 ("Millions for defense, but not one cent for tribute.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: Gondring
I am so glad you are principled and pay your full share of taxes by not claiming that tax exemption government reward for having children!

Here in the Northeast, many people cannot claim their children as a deduction. There's an income phaseout.

44 posted on 07/04/2009 12:06:25 PM PDT by old and tired
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: VicVega
And you are correct, more taxes, fees and VAT's to come.

I guess we'll have to learn to quit eating. /sarc

45 posted on 07/04/2009 5:00:51 PM PDT by pray4liberty (http://www.aroodawakening.tv)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: TigerLikesRooster

I thought they had a one child policy?


46 posted on 07/04/2009 5:03:38 PM PDT by fanfan (Why did they bury Barry's past?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TigerLikesRooster

Man...this thread sure went wacko....lol.


47 posted on 07/04/2009 8:53:13 PM PDT by Tainan (Cogito, ergo conservatus)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Tainan
This is FR. A poster cannot control his thread.:-)
This is a mild case compared with some other thread hijacked way off course.
48 posted on 07/04/2009 11:36:53 PM PDT by TigerLikesRooster (LUV DIC -- L,U,V-shaped recession, Depression, Inflation, Collapse)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson