Center for Neighborhood Enterprise

I caught a segment on The World and Everything In It recently featuring Robert Woodson. He is a black leader who was around for the Civil Rights movement and remembers Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. personally. He has worked for helping those in poverty improve their position through empowerment rather than subsidy.

The basic premise is to look at the poor neighborhoods. Study what the

What he said made a lot of sense. I looked him up and found links and contributions on a number of other sites.

Poverty Cure

Center for Neighborhood Enterprise

The Bob Woodson Show

Traditional Marriage weakened by SCOTUS ruling

English: Rally for Prop 8 in Fresno, Californi...

English: Rally for Prop 8 in Fresno, California Español: Manifestación por Prop 8 en Fresno, California (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

I’m disappointed that the Supreme Court partially ruled against traditional marriage in their decision today. Thankfully they didn’t make a wholesale ruling in favor of so-called same-sex marriage. They still allowed for states to define marriage for themselves.

As far as California’s Prop 8 is concerned, the Court dismissed the appeal. This seems somewhat ambiguous. Prop 8 was a majority vote for an amendment to the California state constitution in favor of traditional marriage between only one man and one woman. A federal judge declared the amendment unconstitutional. The governor refused to appeal this ruling essentially thumbing their noses at the majority popular vote. Conservative groups appealed the federal lower court ruling to the Supreme Court. This appeal was dismissed.

The basis for appealing the dismissal was lack of precedent. Apparently SCOTUS hasn’t before entertained appeals of state laws that were not being defended by the state itself.

So on one hand, SCOTUS has affirmed states to determine a definition of marriage as the state sees fit. On the other hand, the Court didn’t slap down a lower federal court for dictating to California what sort of definition of marriage would be considered constitutional… Ambivalence? I would say somewhat biased toward the redefinition of marriage side.

Hopefully this decision will galvanize further action to strengthen traditional marriage. One way to do this is to sign the Manhattan Declaration.

 

Tipping Points

Gosnell’s House of Horrors

Supporters of Planned Parenthood

Supporters of Planned Parenthood (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

 

This crime is really too horrific to dwell on comfortably, but it is an example of what happens when human life is thought to be cheap. Kermit Gosnell is on trial for the murder of  infants who survived their late-term abortions. He uses a procedure called snipping which basically involves cutting the baby’s spinal cord with scissors. While this sounds like the stuff of horror movies, it is real life. The acts are not denied. It is more of a matter of whether this behavior is wrong in the eyes of the law. This is a mirror held up for the American people to consider what happens when we say it is okay to kill certain innocent humans. Where do we draw the line? Please go to Colson Center to learn more about what we can do to stop this kind of heinous crime. The documentary about this crime is called 3801 Lancaster… the street address of the clinic.

 

Fox News to air 1 hour special broadcast this Sunday

 

YouTube Documentary of Gosnell’s “medical” practices

 

Community of Women?

English: Rep. Albert Wynn (left) joins Gloria ...

English: Rep. Albert Wynn (left) joins Gloria Feldt (right), President of the Planned Parenthood Federation of America, on the steps of the Supreme Court, to rally in support of the pro-choice movement on the Anniversary of Roe v. Wade (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

Although widely criticized from both sides, the callous video celebrating 40 years of abortion-rights Roe v. Wade  featuring actor Mehcad Brooks dovetailed perfectly with the Marxist call for the “community of women” in which the Communist Manifesto basically calls for women to have no restriction on who, when, and for how much they will sleep with men. Really what they meant was for women to be community property. I can imagine that this sounds great to an amoral Marxist man but what woman feels properly valued in that state? If you don’t believe me read it for yourself below. Then ask yourself if the current state of morality on high school and college campuses more closely approximates the “Communist ideal” or a practice that is actually healthy for women?

But you Communists would introduce community of women, screams the bourgeoisie in chorus.

The bourgeois sees his wife a mere instrument of production. He hears that the instruments of production are to be exploited in common, and, naturally, can come to no other conclusion that the lot of being common to all will likewise fall to the women.

He has not even a suspicion that the real point aimed at is to do away with the status of women as mere instruments of production.

For the rest, nothing is more ridiculous than the virtuous indignation of our bourgeois at the community of women which, they pretend, is to be openly and officially established by the Communists. The Communists have no need to introduce free love; it has existed almost from time immemorial.

Our bourgeois, not content with having wives and daughters of their proletarians at their disposal, not to speak of common prostitutes, take the greatest pleasure in seducing each other’s wives.

Bourgeois marriage is, in reality, a system of wives in common and thus, at the most, what the Communists might possibly be reproached with is that they desire to introduce, in substitution for a hypocritically concealed, an openly legalized system of free love. For the rest, it is self-evident that the abolition of the present system of production must bring with it the abolition of free love springing from that system, i.e., of prostitution both public and private.

–from Chapter 2 of the Communist Manifesto

Meaningful Change in the Wake of Sandy Hook

Indoor Shooting Range at Sarasota, Florida, US...

Indoor Shooting Range at Sarasota, Florida, USA. Taken by Kenn. Shooting a Glock 23 (.40 S+W) (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

In the wake of the Newtown, Connecticut shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary School. I, like most other Americans, want to express my shock, sadness, and sympathy to the grieving survivors. My prayers have been with you since I first heard of the tragedy.

I would also like to add my voice to the meaningful debate about what should be done about school shootings. The most important part of the conversation should not center on guns, but on the content we emphasize in our schools and media. The secondary part of the conversation, which many would like to make primary is what to do to make our schools safer from attackers.

First, about the society we are influencing with media and education. As a teacher I cannot help but think that we must stop teaching the lie that there is no right or wrong. We cannot teach the lie that humans are just advanced animals and should not be treated with special dignity and respect. This is the same line of thinking that Hitler used to justify his extermination of so many Jews. Teaching morals, the difference between right and wrong, and the fact that we will have to answer for our actions in either this life or the next would help our nation more than any additional gun laws.

We must not allow the liberal bloc to use this tragedy as an opportunity to disarm America. I agree with Wayne LaPierre and Louie Gomert. There is a reason why these malevolent shooters go to schools and malls and movie theaters. They do not go to local hunting clubs, shooting ranges, or police stations. The shooters go where there will be no armed resistance. People bent on this kind of violence will obtain weapons whether or not there are laws in place.

My proposed solution to protecting our schools is to arm school staff members. It is time for us to put a comprehensive firearms training program in place in our nation’s schools. Every school building should have trained and armed staff members who can respond immediately to this kind of heinous violence. Arming school staff members whether teachers, administrators, or classified staff would be much more cost effective than hiring an entire new group of officers to be at the school. The costs would include training for the staff members and for the weapons themselves. I am impressed with the courage displayed by those teachers and principals who attempted to shield and protect their students with their wits and in many cases with their own bodies. Wouldn’t it have been better if those teachers had been armed with some means of taking out this unhinged madman?

Debating Poverty

Congressman Poe and Governor Mitt Romney

Congressman Poe and Governor Mitt Romney (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

For the 10/15/2012 presidential debate I thought that both candidates reached out to their bases and showed up with their debate faces on. I cannot say that either candidate was a clear winner, but Romney did a good job of keeping the his focus on setting out his plan and making the President answer for his record.

One of the most important points was made close to the end of the debate. Romney brought up the connection between poverty, education, the failing health of our nation, and marriage. Mitt Romney pointed out that a very high number of children are born to unwed mothers today. He mentioned that changing this trend would help improve life for women. Here are a couple more points I wish he had mentioned: This trend can find its roots in the “sexual revolution” of the 60s. We need to move away from that hedonistic, moral relativistic mindset. The majority of our prison populations come from fatherless homes. The majority of these young mothers quickly fall below the poverty line leaving their children living in poverty. Those mothers and children constitute a heavy weight on the American economy because so many of them end up on the welfare rolls.
What we really need here in America is a return to biblical values and commitment to marriage and righteousness in our personal lives. What we need is young men and women who are willing to deny their urges for selfishness, immoral sexual fulfillment, and useless distraction. We need young people who are strong in character that will choose to live a responsible life, marry, and lead families under God.

Trumping Freedom of Religion

Official portrait of United States Health and ...

Official portrait of United States Health and Human Services Secretary . (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

Does the freedom of religion only apply to churches not to individuals? How do they think the HHS mandate exemption is not applicable to any organization besides churches? “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof…” Does HHS think that they don’t have to follow the 1st Amendment because they’re not Congress? They represent the fourth branch of government: the bureaucracy. Since they have piggybacked the HHS mandate onto Obamacare it stands to reason that it is a direct violation of the first amendment.
Actually the problem is that sexual freedoms are running afoul of religious freedoms. Or maybe we should think of it as religious freedoms running afoul of sexual freedom. With the HHS mandate Kathleen Sebelius has made it clear that sexual freedom must trump religious freedom. That’s probably why our founding fathers listed freedom of sexuality before freedom of religion in our Constitution. Of course not! Sexual freedom is not listed in the Constitution. That freedom along with the right of privacy on which abortion on demand is predicated was superimposed on the Constitution by modern courts.

Schools as Subversive

The Morning After Pill

The Morning After Pill (Photo credit: VixyView)

The CATCH program in New York City is distributing the morning after pill to teens as young as 14. School nurses do not have to get permission from parents. This is an opt-out program where parents can sign a document so their children cannot get the pills. 1-2% of the those forms have been returned. The stated purpose of the program is to bring down the teen pregnancy rate: currently at around 7,000 per year in NYC schools.

 

I know of a sure-fire method to bring down the teen pregnancy rate: abstain from sex. As a side benefit, this method protects against STDs as well. It sounds like a winner to me. But… somehow this method is not an option for the New York Department of Education.

 

Is this the work in which we in the public schools want to be involved? One spokesperson said that if they needed parental permission to distribute the birth control/abortifacient medications, it would defeat the purpose of program. “You have to step into the real world not kind of what seems right. And the truth is, if parents had to be asked before Plan B was given to a girl In many, many, probably the most of those instances the girl is going to say, ‘Don’t call my parents.'”

 

Translation: government schools are willing to subvert parental rights and support young people in taking part in activities, in this case, sexual activities, that are not acceptable to their parents. Are we as teachers willing to be a part of that? I’m not.

 

You can listen to a news feature including the quote from above, here: The World and Everything In It | WORLD

 

NYC Schools dispensing morning after pill to girls

 

Tax payer funded drugs without a prescription

 

New York Post article

 

 

 

Gun Control vs. Crime Control

Gun Control

Gun Control (Photo credit: cgulyas2002)

After the shooting in a crowded movie theater near Denver, Colorado, liberals want to talk about gun control again. Why don’t we shift that debate away from what the left seems to think is the answer i.e. increasing gun control. Ergo, now you can be safe in the movie theater or on an airplane or at school because no one will have guns… Does this ring true to you?  Let’s reframe this discussion. What if we advocate that more people should be carrying guns.

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed. –The Constitution of the United States; Amendment 2

What if those 70 shooting victims in the Aurora movie theater had been armed? Do you suppose there may have been fewer casualties? Has our society degraded to the point where we can’t trust normal law-abiding citizens to protect themselves and fight off mass shooters? Is the liberal lens such that they figure no regular people should have guns. I guess it makes it easy for the police to deal with that armed situation… Police can just shoot anybody who has a gun because they obviously should not have them….

I would be interested in some history on this point. We have the impression from movies and books that most frontier Americans carried a six shooter on their belt, or a derringer in their garter, and a rifle on their horse or in the wagon. When did this stop being commonplace? How were violent crime rates and accidental shooting death rates back then?

Here is the unfortunate situation in our modern education system:

 You are just evolved blobs of tissue.

There is no absolute right or wrong

Hmm. is it any wonder this de-volves into the social chaos which our nation seems to be heading toward. Having a gun to protect my family and property from would-be crooks seems to be becoming a necessity.

Logo of the Family Research Council.

Logo of the Family Research Council. (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

With the shooting at the Family Research Council (FRC) in Washington D.C. we are reminded how important it is that we use our words carefully. For the past four years and longer, pro-family, pro-traditional marriage supporters have been labelled as “hate-mongers”. Simply taking a stand against so-called gay marriage is labelled as hate speech. Thankfully the shooter was stopped before anyone was seriously injured. The building manager who stopped the man sustained a gunshot to the arm, but is expected to make a full recovery. I agree with FRC president Tony Perkins that the extreme rhetoric serves to inflame issues beyond a civil discussion.

Here is the statement by the Southern Poverty Law Center denying their labeling of FRC as a hate group as problematic. Here is a video of the statement of Tony Perkins.

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 33 other followers