Everyone responded directly to the 'questions' - which weren't appropriate to ask to begin with. No one seems uncomfortable with their answers at all - you just don't want to accept the truth and have to assign vile alterior motives to something as simple as people with the means to do so providing a loving home to a child who was homeless and had no family to love her.
Put frankly, people go to Africa (or Haiti, Cambodia, wherever) to adopt kids for a couple of reasons. They either want them as fashion accessories, like rich girls carrying around expensive little dogs in their purses... or they want to be able to hold them up as merit badges that advance their status in our politically correct culture. Just like white people perceive power in claiming a smidge of ethnic ancestry, they also get brownie points for standing up and saying in a solemn voice that they adopted a kid from Timbuktu and have supposedly suffered the slings and arrows of their intolerant cohorts for their good deed.
I've seen many ridiculous things written before, but that would have to rank in the top 1%.
Anyone who has actually endured the protracted rectal exam that is qualifying for international adoption will know the statements you refer to are on par with the idiots who showed up at emergency rooms demanding their "free healthcare."
I don't know - makes sense because then the kid will get his $164,000 in reparations when Obama signs Executive Bill 8762 on his last day in office.
Thank goodness they didn't buy some kid from Mexico - we got enough of them already.
Okay - enough of my sarcastic rant. The Christian church is pretty active in Ethiopia, and wouldn't surprise me if they were on a mission trip, etc. My brother's family used to go down to Honduras and worked at an orphanage for many years. One boy my brother took under his wing, and after he was too old for the orphanage my brother paid for him to go to college down there. The kid changed his last name to ours - a good Scandinavian name at that!