Politically Correct Propaganda

In my study of communist societies, I came to the conclusion that the purpose of communist propaganda was not to persuade or convince, not to inform, but to humiliate; and therefore, the less it corresponded to reality the better. When people are forced to remain silent when they are being told the most obvious lies, or even worse when they are forced to repeat the lies themselves, they lose once and for all their sense of probity. To assent to obvious lies is…in some small way to become evil oneself. One’s standing to resist anything is thus eroded, and even destroyed. A society of emasculated liars is easy to control. I think if you examine political correctness, it has the same effect and is intended to.

Theodore Dalrymple

The Right to Bear Arms Prevents Tyranny from Government

As civil rulers, not having their duty to the people before them, may attempt to tyrannize, and as the military forces which must be occasionally raised to defend our country, might pervert their power to the injury of their fellow citizens, the people are confirmed by the article [2nd Amendment] in their right to keep and bear their private arms.

Tench Coxe, “Remarks on the First Part of the Amendments to the Constitution,” under pseudonym “A Pennsylvanian.”  Philadelphia Federal Gazette, 18 June 1789.

Congress Has No Power To Disarm

Congress have no power to disarm the militia.  Their swords, and every other terrible implement of the soldier, are the birthright of an American . . .  The unlimited power of the sword is not in the hands of either the federal or state government, but, where I trust in God it will ever remain, in the hands of the people.

Tench Coxe, Pennsylvania Gazette, 20 February 1788.

An Armed Populace Prevents Military Rule

Before a standing army can rule, the people must be disarmed; as they are in almost every kingdom of Europe.  The supreme power in America cannot enforce unjust laws by the sword; because the whole body of the people are armed, and constitute a force superior to any bands of regular troops that can be, on any pretense, raised in the United States.

Noah Webster, “An Examination into the Leading Principles of the Federal Constitution,” 1787.

I'm For Morality

The Atheists Own Your Kids in School

Children spend the majority of their waking hours in school. Parents invest a good portion of their life savings in college education and entrust their offspring to people who are supposed to educate them. Isn’t it wonderful that educators have figured out a way to make parents the instruments of their own undoing? Isn’t it brilliant that they have persuaded Christian moms and dads to finance the destruction of their own beliefs and values? Who said atheists aren’t clever?

Dinesh D’Souza, What’s So Great About Christianity

The Reason for Militia

What, sir, is the use of a militia?  It is to prevent the establishment of a standing Army, the bane of liberty…. Whenever Governments mean to invade the rights and liberties of the people, they always attempt to destroy the militia, in order to raise an army upon their ruins.”

Rep. Elbridge Gerry of Massachusetts, on floor debate over the Second Amendment [I Annals of Congress at 750 {August 17,1789}]

Liberals Will Go to War to Preserve Abortion

No liberal cause is defended with more dishonesty than abortion.  No matter what else they pretend to care about from time to time — undermining national security, aiding terrorists, oppressing the middle class, freeing violent criminals — the single most important item on the Democrats’ agenda is abortion.  Indeed, abortion is the one issue the Democratic Party is willing to go to war over — except in the Muslim world, which is jam-packed with prohibitions on abortion, but going to war against a Muslim nation might also serve America’s national security objectives.  Liberals don’t care about women.  They care about destroying human life.  To them, 2,200 military deaths in the entire course of a war in Iraq is unconscionable, but 1.3 million aborted babies in America every year is something to celebrate.

Ann Coulter, “Godless” causes liberals to pray…for a book burning,” Townhall 6/21/06.

Black Poverty Due To Fatherlessness

More than 75 percent of African-Americans are in the middle or upper class in 2005.  Among those who make up the 24.7 percent in poverty, the overwhelming majority are unmarried women with children.  Family structure is the alpha and omega of poverty in America.  You cn slice the statistical pie in a thousand ways and still come to the same conclusion.  For example: In 1995, the poverty rate for married couple black families was about 8 percent.

In the same year, the poverty rate for families headed by white single women was about 27 percent.  As David Eggebeen and Daniel T. Lichter we rote in the American Sociological Review, “Children from female-headed homes are five times as likely to be poor as children in two-parent families and nine times s likely to be in deep poverty.”  Maggie Gallagher, massaging the data a bit more to include a comparison with families that start and remain intact, yielded this statistic:  “A child that is born out of wedlock is 30 times more likely to live in poverty than a child that was born in a marriage and whose parents stayed married.”

The prisons are full of African-American youths.  … But not just any African-Americans crowd the prisons.  The prisons are dominated by males raised without fathers.  And while the illegitimacy rate among Americans at large is frighteningly high at 25 percent, it is stratospheric among blacks at 68 percent.

Mona Charen, “Black poverty isn’t about white racism,” Conservative Chronicle, 26 October 2005

Poor Do It To Themselves

A majority of poor people, however, are poor because they did it to themselves.  They failed to educate themselves.  No matter how lousy government schools are, you can learn in them if you want to.  One study of Asian children found that they excelled whether they attended a good school or a slum school.  The difference was, their parents motivated them to learn.

Besides, there is hardly a city or town in America that doesn’t have a public library, and there’s a Ph.D.’s worth of knowledge sitting on those shelves, free for the taking.  Harrison Ford, the actor, went to a library and taught himself to be a master carpenter before he became a successful actor.  The public libraries are probably one of the most valuable and least used resources in America that are available to everyone.

Some people are poor because they develop drug or alcohol addictions.  Chemical addictions are not racial in the least.  I know of a former lawyer and judge, white as bleached flour, who wrecked his career, his family and his life because of an addiction to crack cocaine.  A chemical addiction can drive anybody down if it is not faced and stopped.

Some people are poor because they never developed good work habits or even good grooming.  Nobody is going to hire some kid with his pants down around his buttocks, who talks jive instead of English, and who is two days from his last brush with soap and water.  Nobody is going to keep or promote someone who is chronically late for work, watches the clock and is the first out the door. …

Some people are poor because they never learn to handle money.  Government schools and a lot of parents fail their children in this regard.  It’s one of the most important things a child can learn, because the formula for success is simple: You must spend less than you earn; you must save and then invest.  That’s all there is too it.  There are thousands of how-to books written on the subject, but the good ones all boil down to those three rules.  Spend less than you earn. Save it. Invest it. …

Finally, as sad as it is to say it, some people are poor because they are stupid and/or lazy.  These you can’t help.  They will either squander or let somebody gyp them out of whatever you give them. …  But don’t buy this con game of laying poverty on the non-poor.  It’s bull uttered by people with an ideological interest in big government.

Charley Reese, “Poor do it to themselves,” Conservative Chronicle 10/19/05

The Fundamentals of Marriage

Here, then, is this basic fundamental teaching — the man is to be the head of the wife, and he is to be the head of the family.  God made him that way, endowed him with the faculties and powers and propensities that enable him to fulfill this; and so made woman that she should be the “complement” of man.  Now the word “complement” carries in itself the notion of submission; her main function is to make up a deficiency in the man.  That is why these two become “one flesh”; the woman is the complement of the man.  But the emphasis, therefore, is this, that man is responsible not only for himself, but for his wife, and for his family in all ultimate matters.  The wife is to help him, to support him, to aid him, and to do everything she can in order to enable him to function as the lord of creation, into which position God has placed him.  She is brought into being in order to help man to perform that great and wonderful and glorious task.  That is the basic teaching with regard to the relationship of husbands and wives as laid down in the very order of creation, the fundamental rule with regard to the life of man in this world.

D. Martyn Lloyd-Jones, Life in the Spirit in Marriage, Home & Work: An Exposition of Ephesians 5:18-6:9, pg.105

Adoption By Same-sex Couples is Not Good For Children

Someone might ask, “Adoption, of course, does not provide children with both biological parents either, but we allow this.  Why?”  Simply because adoption is a heroic effort of a couple to provide a mother and father and loving home for a child who does not have this.  As such, it is an exceptional act, and no one is saying that adoption is just as good for a child as living with both biological parents, assuming that they could provide a good home.  Adoption is a wonderful and selfless act of charity, but it can never become a social norm, as same-sex advocates are arguing for same-sex families, which is largely a selfish act.  It wouldn’t be a good thing for everyone to raise everyone else’s child, just as it wouldn’t be a good thing for  every child to be separated from his or her biological parents and placed in a same-sex home.  Biological mothers and fathers raising their own biological children is the ideal.  When the idea is not attainable for some reason, adoption by married mothers and fathers is a loving and heroic alternative.  It is the next-best thing.  Same-sex parenting is not.

Glenn T. Stanton and Dr. Bill Maier, “Marriage on Trial: The Case Against Same-Sex Marriage and Parenting,” pg.85 footnote

Pre-Marital Sex Ruins the Foundation for Marriage

The very nature of a male-female relationship is that of companionship, friendship and intimacy.  The marriage relationship is supposed to last a lifetime, and to make that possible, people get to know one another in the period leading up to the marriage.  They are not committed to the one another legally, morally or otherwise.  They do not live together and do not have mutual responsibilities.  They are free to spend time together and learn what makes each other tick, free to question and discuss and debate.  They are able to make clear-headed choices about spending their lives together.  When the growing intimacy between them leads to the altar, they know what they are getting.  After the wedding, they are free to seal the relationship as only a husband and wife can do.

The above process comprises the foundation for building a lifelong relationship.  When sex enters the scene too soon, the foundation is weakened and frequently collapses completely.  As many [researchers] have stated, sex takes over dating relationships like wildfire.  It consumes everything built to that point.

One of the first casualties is communication.  When a couple has found a quick way to be “intimate” by having sex, they don’t bother taking time to become mentally and emotionally and spiritually intimate.  They become lazy in their attempts to grow closer, opting for what is easy over what is lasting.

The next casualty is trust.  When people have revealed their character to each other by having sex before marriage, there is distrust on both sides.  Each knows the other is incapable of controlling their physical desires.  What will happen if they should be apart for a while?  What is to keep each from seeking out other opportunities for gratification?  Frequently, nothing.  Whether they say it out loud or not, they know it.

One by one, the vital mutual concerns needed to built a lasting intimate relationship are consumed by sex.  Sex displaces and then destroys love.

Josh McDowell and Dick Day, "Why Wait?" p.292-293

Guns Are For OUR Protection

Stepfamilies Are Problematic

For  child to have an unrelated parenting-adult in the home, says eminent Rutgers family sociologist David Popenoe, is no small matter:

Social scientists used to believe that, for positive child outcomes, stepfamilies were preferable to single-parent families.  Today, we are not so sure.  Stepfamilies typically have an economic advantage, but some recent studies indicated that the children of stepfamilies have as many behavioral and emotional problems as the children of single-parent families, and possibly more. . . . Stepfamily problems, in short, may be so intractable that the best strategy for dealing with them is to do everything possible to minimize their occurrence.  (emphasis added)

Glenn T. Stanton, "The Ring Makes All the Difference," p.77-78

Leave God and the State Gains Power

It is significant that the declining belief in God among early 19th-century German intellectuals was accompanied by an increasing emphasis on the state.  The same is observable in America today—a marked decline in the influence of religion since World War I has been accompanied by a huge increase in state power.  Not surprisingly, as people lose sight of life’s higher meaning they rely more and more on the state, which becomes a substitute for God.

Joseph Keysor, “Hitler, the Holocaust, and the Bible,” pg. 275

Women Need Men For Their Children

Biologically, women can choose to go at motherhood alone.  They need a man for only a very few moments; through scientific advances, they can even avoid contact with a man.  Whether a mother decides from the start that her child needs no father or she later ejects the father from the family through divorce, or whether a man walks out, the wisdom and stability of thousands of years is being replaced with the latest trend.  Statistics show overwhelmingly that after a divorce, men reduce contact with their families.  When men initiate divorce, they not only hurt their wives and children, they also hurt themselves in terms of diminished health and reduced economic prowess.  Even more seriously, they impact future American generations in way in ways impossible to fully appreciate at the moment.

Rabbi Daniel Lapin, "America's Real War," pg.186

What Led to the Death of Marriage

Long before there was a debate about same-sex anything, far too many heterosexuals bought into a liberal ideology about sexuality that makes a mess of marriage: cohabitation, no-fault divorce, extramarital sex, non marital childbearing, pornography, and the hook-up culture all contributed to the breakdown of the marriage culture.  The push for the legal redefinition of marriage didn’t cause any of these problems.  It is, rather, their ideological conclusion.  The problem is that it’s the logical conclusion of a bad train of logic.

Ryan T. Anderson, “Truth Overruled: The Future of Marriage and Religious Freedom,” pg.16

The Second Oldest Profession

The psychiatrist Fuller Torrey once described psychology as “the world’s second oldest profession, remarkably similar to the first.  Both involve a contract (implicit or explicitly) between a specialist and a client for a service, and for this service a fee is paid.”  Both professions shape themselves and their services to fit the wishes and feelings of their client, to make them feel better in body or in mind, but the underlying goal is to do whatever has to be done in order to make a living.  “Give the customer what he wants” is the motto, whether it is the pleasure of sex, the benefits of strong workers and soldiers, the thrill of self-actualization or the blamelessness of victimhood.  In this liaison, American society has abandoned its moral and cultural tradition while psychology has lost its soul and neglected, even scorned, its own scientific foundation.

Dr. Tana Dineen in, “Manufacturing Victims: What the Psychology Industry is Doing to People,” pg. 266

I disagree with Dr. Dineen in that psychology never had a “scientific foundation.”

Don't Believe the LIE!

We’ll know our disinformation program is complete when everything the American public believes is false. 

CIA director William Casey, 1981

H/T Alec Satin

The Lies of Sexual Anarchy

There is no such thing as same-sex “marriage.”  Marriage is one thing only, the union of a man and a woman, and that’s all it will ever be, no matter how many evil-bad court opinions and laws are rendered or passed to the contrary.  Likewise, there is no such thing as a “transgender” person.  There are men and women, and that’s all there will ever be, regardless of how deep the deception grows in our nation and world.  A man who believes he is a woman is not a woman, but a man under strong delusion.

People who want nothing to do with either of these things are not acting in “hatred.”  That’s perhaps the biggest of the lies being told by pushers of the sexual anarchist movement.  Possessing the wisdom to know that there are unchanging and unchangeable truths of right and wrong that apply to all people equally, and embracing that knowledge, is not “hatred.”  It’s wisdom.  It’s discernment.  It’s proper judgment, something the Bible calls us to engage in always, all the ignorant misuses of the “judge not” Scriptures notwithstanding.

Gina Miller, The Facts About the Mississippi Religious Freedom Protection Act

Marriage Is Not a Human Contrivance

Marriage is not a human contrivance or arrangement, but God’s ordinance, something instituted by God, something that God in His infinite grace and kindness has appointed and ordained and prepared and established for men and women.  It is of God and not of man.  The teaching of the anthropologists is based on speculation and imagination; it is not true.  The teaching of the Bible is the truth about this matter; it is God’s contrivance and God’s ordinance.

D. Martyn Lloyd-Jones, Life in the Spirit in Marriage, Home & Work: An Exposition of Ephesians 5:18-6:9, pg. 97

Feminism Destroys Marriage

Examine the commonly held view of marriage, and of the marriage state and relationship.  You see it in the cartoons, you see it in the reports of the cases in the courts, you see it, I say again, in the popular jokes.  Why should it be thus?  How has this come to be so current?  It is because of this completely wrong view of what marriage really means.  Today the whole question has become aggravated because of the modern notions of equality between men and women resulting from the so-called feminist movement.  This has aggravated the whole problem; and it makes the subject we are dealing with particularly urgent at the present time.  There has been this modern movement of feminism which claims that men and women are equal in every respect, and that there should be no division or distinction at all, but complete equality.  Now while, on the one hand, there are aspects of that teaching with which any Christian man, leave alone any sane intelligent man, must agree with the whole of his being, on the other hand, taking it in general, and as a principle, it goes against the plain teaching of the Scripture at this point.  It is without any question the cause of much confusion, much trouble, and much damage, not only to the marriage state, but also to the family as a fundamental unit in life.  The result is that discipline has gone, order has gone, and children are not given a chance.  Why?  Because their parents are not in the right relationship to one another; and the child is bewildered at seeing this competition, this conflict, where there should be unity.  This modern feminist movement has tended to becloud the whole issue; and, alas! it seems even to be seeping into the thinking of many who call themselves evangelical, and who claim to believe in the Scripture as the infallible Word of God and our only authority.

D. Martyn Lloyd-Jones, Life in the Spirit in Marriage, Home & Work: An Exposition of Ephesians 5:18-6:9, pg.96-97

Two People of the Same Sex Do Harm Raising Kids

[A] wise and loving society never intentionally creates fatherless or motherless families. . . .

The two most loving mothers in the world can’t be a father to a little boy.  Love can’t equip mothers to teach a little boy how to be a man.  Likewise, the two most loving men can’t be a mother to a child.  Love does little to help a man teach a little girl how to be a woman.  Can you imagine two men guiding a young girl through her first menstrual cycle or helping her through the awkwardness of picking out her first bra?  Such a situation might make for a funny television sitcom but not a very good real-life situation for a young girl!

Here are some questions to think about.  How can to loving, homosexual men teach a young boy to care for and love a woman?  How will the boy observe this in a home where it doesn’t exist?  What will two loving moms teach a little girl about men?  How healthy will that picture be?  Don’t same-sex relationships, by definition fail to provide many of the important things children need, since they are missing one of that child’s natural parents and one essential part of humanity?

Glenn T. Stanton and Dr. Bill Maier, “Marriage on Trial: The Case Against Same-Sex Marriage and Parenting,” pg.71

Sex Needs Commitment

When we delay physical involvement to its proper time, we allow the relationship to grow and mature.  Then, once that relationship has developed into a lifelong marriage commitment, sex can become meaningful, constructive and beneficial to the relationship.  Until that commitment is sealed, however, the couple needs to spend time discovering each other, finding out what it is that makes the other unique and attractive.  This forms the friendship that lays the foundation for love, which leads to the personal intimacy each seeks.

Josh McDowell and Dick Day, "Why Wait?" p.282

The Insult of Cohabitation

Cohabitation is really an insult to your beloved: “I’m not totally sure about you.  Can I give you a test-drive first, so I can be sure?”  Melts your heart, doesn't it?

Glenn T. Stanton, "The Ring Makes All the Difference," p.69-70

Goal of Education

All education is aimed at instilling something into children—a belief that Darwinism is true and that homosexuality is normal, that religion is bad or irrelevant are the ideas taught by modern America’s leftist anti-religious educators.

Joseph Keysor, “Hitler, the Holocaust, and the Bible,” pg. 270

Live Without God?

The greatest question of our time is not communism versus individualism, not Europe versus America, not even East versus the West; it is whether men can live without God.

Will Durant, historian

Obesity Is Not A Mental Illness

Mental disorder is not causing the obesity epidemic.  And treating a fake mental disorder can’t fix it.  It won’t help to label as psychiatrically sick the victims of our dumb public policies; it’s far better to change the policies.  No more fructose subsidies.  No more Coke and fries served with school lunches.  No more streets without sidewalks that discourage walking.  Let’s restore physical education in the schools; add calorie counts to every menu; subsidize vegetables; give people tax deductions and lower insurance premiums for losing weight; install free bikes at stands in cities everywhere.  In short, we need to do whatever it takes from a public policy standpoint to encourage people to eat less and exercise more.

Allen Frances, M.D, "Saving Normal," pp.183

Husband Should Be Family Breadwinner

Those women who, despite possessing skills, talents, and qualifications desired in the workforce, dedicate themselves to their families and their communities do their husbands an enormous favor.  By allowing their men the privilege of supporting them and their family, they confer the feeling of being needed that men yearn for.  In addition, those fortunate men enjoy added incentive to succeed financially.  To them, work is no longer selfish and intrinsically valueless.  Because it is for the benefit of others, it has become noble.  No higher motivation to succeed exists.

Rabbi Daniel Lapin, "America's Real War," pg.186

Same-sex Unions Do Not Compare with Interracial Marriage

Bans on interracial marriage…were part of an insidious system of racial subordination and exploitation that denied the equality and dignity of all human beings and forcibly segregated citizens based on race.  When these interracial marriage bans first arose in the American colonies, there were inconsistent not only with the common law of England but with the customs of every previous culture throughout human history.

As for the Bible, while it doesn’t present marriage as having anything to do with race, it insists that marriage has everything to do with sexual complimentarity.  From the beginning of Genesis to the end of Revelation, the Bible is replete with spousal imagery and the language of husband and wife.  One activist Supreme Court ruling cannot overthrow the truth about marriage that is expressed in faith and reason and universal human experience.

Ryan T. Anderson, “Truth Overruled: The Future of Marriage and Religious Freedom,” pg.7

The Fraud of Psychotherapy

Psychotherapy is an undefined technique applied to unspecified cases with unpredictable results.  For this technique, rigorous training is required.

Dr. Victor Raimy, cited by Dr. Tana Dineen in, “Manufacturing Victims: What the Psychology Industry is Doing to People,” pg. 254

Dehumanizing People With Same-Sex Fake Marriage

The significance of gender is demolished by the essence of same-sex marriage.  Once it is made morally equal to natural marriage it will diminish the femininity of every woman.  There will be minimal differences of men and women left over, and they are purely physiological.  A woman’s surrogate womb becomes the only part of femininity that is needed to create a male same-sex family.  A woman is reduced to a womb and its practical function, and this is a horrible message to send to women and girls.  Reducing gender to physiology is, well, dehumanizing.

Similarly, one lesbian same-sex marriage—once it is seen as morally equal to natural marriage—will diminish the masculinity of every man, for the only thing important about manhood will be sperm.  This is a bad message to send to men and boys.  They are reduced to being impersonal parts—things, not persons.  Both views are deeply antihuman because they are deeply anti-male and -female.

This turn in our understanding of gender will create far more—rather than less—confusion within us as individuals and dissension among us in our relationships with others; it will not allow us to be true to our respective genders—who we really are!  Same-sex marriage deconstructs our humanity as expressed in our masculinity and femininity.  Masculinity an femininity become morally, personally and interpersonally meaningless.

Glenn T. Stanton and Dr. Bill Maier, “Marriage on Trial: The Case Against Same-Sex Marriage and Parenting,” pg.57

Sex Has A Binding Effect

Sexual intercourse has a psychologically binding effect, particularly for females.  The act of itself increases the feeling of closeness.  In uncommitted and temporary relationships where sexual intimacy, with its psychologically bonding effect, is shared, there is considerable risk of hurt.  Nearly always, one partner has become more deeply involved than the other.  And there is no recognized religious or social influence to hold a temporary “mate” or “friend” to the other.  All that these temporary partners share is the dangerous freedom of “for as long as it feels good.” Either partner is always vulnerable to rejection, which happens more often that not in such relationships, and the break is very hard for one or both.  One can say “no strings,” but that is not possible.  There always are strings and tearing them always hurts, inflicting injuries that may take years or a lifetime to heal.  

Dorothy L. Williams, “There Is A Season . . . Studies in Human Sexuality for Youth of Christian Churches and Their Parents,” pg.91.  Cited by Josh McDowell and Dick Day, "Why Wait?" p.265

Don't Walk the Sex Tightrope

In both situations (premarital sex and cohabitation) intimate emotional, physical, and even spiritual bonds are being made—without being backed up by the kind of commitment they demand.  It is like walking on a tightrope without a net below.

Glenn T. Stanton, "The Ring Makes All the Difference," p.63

How Well Do Your Kids Read?

A 2014 study  found that the number of books in your home is by far the most important predictor of your child’s grade-level reading performance—more than your income or education level.  Students whose homes had at least 100 books read one and a half grade levels above those with fewer books in the house.

Michelle Crouch, “13 Things Your House Reveals About You,” Reader’s Digest, April 2016, pg.135.

Feeling is NOT Thinking!

The Power of Bad Ideologies

By the power of an ideology one does more than merely delight in such primitive emotions as hatred and love of violence.  No, with the help of an ideology one can perpetrate the most horrible mass atrocities on Jews, kulaks, or unborn infants in the sincere belief that one is benefiting mankind.

Joseph Keysor, “Hitler, the Holocaust, and the Bible,” pg. 234

Turning Tantrums Into Psychiatric Disorder

Child psychiatrists often dare to go where no one has gone before—and children wind up paying the price.  They keep inventing new ways to wildly over diagnose psychiatric illness in kids.  Perviously I mentioned a study that found 83 percent of kids qualify for mental disorder diagnosis by the time they are twenty-one.  Now the child researchers have taken it a step further—introducing a new DSM-5 diagnosis that may get the number even closer to 100 percent.  First called “temper dysregulation disorder,” then rechristened with the tongue-twisting “disruptive mood dysregulation disorder” (DMDD); the idea of turning temper tantrums into a mental disorder is terrible, however named.  We should not have the ambition to label as mental disorder every inconvenient or distressing aspect of childhood.

Allen Frances, M.D, "Saving Normal," p.177

Father and Child Bond is Important

The all-important bond between father and child is one of the crucial distinctions between man and animal.  All creatures maintain some kind of bond with their mothers; only humans recognize their fathers.  Which is why the growing number of young Americans who literally do not know their fathers is so troubling. 

Rabbi Daniel Lapin, "America's Real War," pg.185

Who Rules Over You?

H/T to J.L. Pattison

The Culture of Chastity-shaming

Fulton Sheen aptly diagnosed the modern sexual situation: “Sex is thought about as a medium of pleasure to such a degree that it has become an obsession.” Even in our sex-saturated culture, student organizations like the Love and Fidelity Network have formed in reaction to the college culture, which masks sexual libertinism in Slut Walks and speech against “slut-shaming”—efforts that often only lead to “chastity shaming” instead. Even women well versed in feminist theory find pop culture’s presentation of feminism unsatisfying, with its insistence on the bifurcation of the self—dividing the physical from the personal and the emotional from the sexual. . . .

The body is not merely our possession: It is a sacred property created and preserved by God. As temples of the Holy Spirit, created in the image of God, we are reflections of the divine. If our bodies were merely instruments, then pornography, sex trafficking, and slavery would be legitimate uses of the body. Yet as Fulton Sheen writes, “sex instinct in a pig and love in a person are not the same, precisely because love is found in the will, not in the glands—and will does not exist in a pig.”

To reduce our sexual being to a merely animalistic instinct is to diminish an integral aspect of the human person. Our sexual identity is bound up with much more than our glands: It is inseparable from our personalities, and most importantly, it is sanctioned by the will. The willed “yes” of spouses is so much more than sex between two animals. “One of the noblest projects of the race,” R.F. Trevett writes, “the subordination of the sexual passions to love and to generation through love—has been approved, ratified, consecrated, assumed into the union of Christ with mankind.” The human emotions tied to the sexual act go far beyond mere pleasure and pain, but instead include our most profound part: the spirit.

Samantha Schroeder, Personal Love and the Call to Chastity

Erotic Egotism and the Gift of Self

In today’s increasingly narcissistic culture, the focus on the ego is overwhelmingly pervasive. And the greatest victim of the age of narcissism is the family. The contraceptive mentality has become the scourge of Western civilization, creating a demographic crisis and poisoning modern man’s philosophical outlook. Contraceptives propagate erotic egotism, leading to its natural end—abortion, the deliberate destruction of a human life.

When sex begins and ends with the self, we make allowances for the technologies of narcissism: birth control pills, condoms, and abortions. This contraceptive attitude is fundamentally at odds with the attitude of true love: life-giving love as an expression of a full gift of self. “The body is a Temple of God,” writes Fulton Sheen; “with some modern minds, man is merely a beast.” Today’s cultural arbiters would have us believe that the deep spiritual communion of the conjugal act is merely sexual satisfaction for beasts. The contraceptive mentality violates the sanctity of the human person and the body as a temple.

Consider the outcomes of the two approaches. Viewing the body as a temple of God opens the way for a cultivation of both emotional and physical chastity, protected by prayer and bolstered by the promise of love while dating, and consummating your wedding night with a spouse who promises to love you until death. Viewing the body as a beast of pleasure embraces the pursuit of boundless sexual pleasures with strangers, protected by condoms and abortions, and maybe ending up married someday after you’ve sown your wild oats. Which story has a better ending?

Samantha Schroeder, Personal Love and the Call to Chastity

Addictions Can Not Be Cured as Diseases

Addiction treatment is a cash cow for the Psychology Industry, which has argued, in most cases successfully, that treatment of the “disease” ought to be covered by health insurance.  The state of Minnesota has declared alcoholism to be a treatable disease and adopted legislation against the firing of employees who are unable to perform their jobs because of drunkenness.  They must be treated at the employer’s (or insurer’s) expense, even though most of the data show treatment to be ineffective.  A survey of Fortune 500 companies indicated that 79 percent recognized that substance abuse was a “significant or very significant problem” in their organizations.  However, when asked whether the treatment programs did any good, “the overwhelming majority saw few results from these programs. In the survey, 87 percent reported little or no change in absenteeism since the programs began and 90 percent saw little or no change in productivity ratings.” . . . 

It seems that, whatever the results, addiction treatment is identifiably a business that ignores its failures.  In fact its failures lead to more business.  Its technology, based on continued recovering, presumes relapses. Recidivism is used as an argument for further funding rather than as evidence of an ineffective treatment.

Dr. Tana Dineen in, “Manufacturing Victims: What the Psychology Industry is Doing to People,” pg. 214-215

This demonstrates the whole problem of treating addictions as diseases — addictions are not illnesses, rather they are a result of poor choices and can be ended by choosing to end them.

Civics or Social Studies?

HT to Danny

How Would Same-Sex Fake Marriage Hurt You? #4

Your place of worship will be forced to hire homosexuals and play by new draconian rules that impose homosexuality.  A Catholic adoption charity recently closed its doors in Massachusetts rather than offer children to homosexual couples as the state mandated.  This new rule was the direct result of government-backed same-sex marriage.  Tolerance will become a one-way street—you need to tolerate and even advance homosexuality, but homosexual activists don’t need to tolerate your view.

Free speech and religion rights will be curtailed as opposition to homosexuality is criminalized as “hate speech” (as is now the case in Canada and Sweden).  This should wake up religious people who erroneously believe they ought not to be involved in politics.  Politics affects your ability to practice your religion!  Once same-sex marriage is approved, it will not be long before you will be fined or imprisoned for expressing any opposition to homosexuality.  People with religious moral convictions will be considered worse than racists.

Frank Turek, “Correct, NOT Politically Correct,” pg.54-55 (2008)

How Would Same-Sex Fake Marriage Hurt You? #3

Homosexual couples will be given legal preference to adopt due to their inability to procreate.  In other words, homosexuals will not be granted equal rights but superior rights—rights that will supersede your rights as a citizen.  Tragically, children will be treated as trophies that, in effect, validate homosexual relationships.

Your children will be indoctrinated, with or without your consent, to accept homosexual behavior and same-sex marriage as the moral and social equivalent of heterosexual behavior and marriage (we are seeing this in our public schools already, especially in California and Massachusetts.

Your workplace will attempt to indoctrinate you to the same ends—and if you refuse, you will either lose your job or not be considered a “team player.” (This is already happening through “diversity” training in many companies; it will become universal if same-sex marriage becomes law.)

Frank Turek, “Correct, NOT Politically Correct,” pg.53-54 (2008)

How Would Same-Sex Fake Marriage Hurt You? #2

Medical insurance premiums will rise to offset the higher health care costs associated with homosexual behavior (i.e., AIDS, colon cancer, hepatitis and other diseases) which will likely increase if we approve same-sex marriage.  Medical premiums would rise further if insurance companies are mandated to cover fertility treatments for lesbian couples (there’s sure to be some judge somewhere to order that!).

Employee benefits will be reduced as employers are mandated to spread their limited benefit dollars to include homosexual partners.  Limited benefit dollars given to homosexuals must come from somewhere; indeed, they are taken away from everyone else—married couples raising children.

Frank Turek, “Correct, NOT Politically Correct,” pg.53 (2008)

How Would Same-Sex Fake Marriage Hurt You? #1

Income taxes will be increased to make up for the marriage tax benefits given to homosexual couples and to pay for the social costs resulting from the increase in illegitimacy.  We provide financial benefits to married couples because they produce and care for children.  Why should homosexual couples get the same benefits as men and women raising children?  Moreover, providing financial incentives for homosexual unions would be doubly counterproductive.  First, taxpayers would be subsidizing, and thus encouraging destructive behavior.  Second, we then would pay for the results of that behavior in the form of increased medical and social costs.

Social Security taxes will be increased (or benefits decreased) in order to pay survivor support benefits to homosexual “widow” and “widowers.”

Frank Turek, “Correct, NOT Politically Correct,” pg.52-53 (2008)

How Could Same-Sex Fake Marriage Harm Children?

Same-sex marriage teaches children and their generation that marriage is merely about fulfilling adult sexual and emotional desire, nothing more.  Many approaches to and philosophies of heterosexual marriage already teach this, and same-sex marriage will only help solidify it.

Same-sex marriage—like easy divorce, cohabitation, pre- and extramarital sex, and unmarried childbearing—relativize family relationships.  It promotes a smorgasbord mentality for family life: choose what suits your tastes, and one choice is as good as another.  But no society has ever been able to sustain itself with such a view of family life.

Same-sex marriage will teach little boys that the idea of being a good family man—caring and sacrificing himself for one woman and their children—is not expected or even virtuous, but merely one lifestyle choice among many.  Same-sex marriage teaches our daughters that being committed to and helping socialize a husband and bearing and raising children with him is only one family lifestyle choice among many.

In short the entire meaning and significance of marriage itself, and what it means to be male and female, will be radically changed.  So will the choices and behaviors of those who grow up within that altered social context.

Glenn T. Stanton and Dr. Bill Maier, “Marriage on Trial: The Case Against Same-Sex Marriage and Parenting,” pg.55-56

Please Read and Learn!

HT to J.L. Pattison

Sex Should Never Be Casual

There is no possibility of having sexual intercourse without meshing a part of your non-physical self.  Sex is such a definite experience that a part of each of you remains forever a part of the other.  How many times and how casually are you willing to invest a portion of your total self and accept such an investment from another person, with no assurance that the investment is for keeps?

Stacy Rinehart and Paula Rinehart, “Choices,” pg.92 cited by Josh McDowell and Dick Day, "Why Wait?" p.258

Cohabiting Leads To Poor Relationships

Research is also discovering the process of cohabiting itself can influence couples to learn to communicate, negotiate, and settle differences in ways that are less healthy and honest than those of couples who didn’t cohabit before marriage.  This is probably because without a clearly defined relationship, the cohabiting couple can learn to be more controlling and manipulative with each other.  And this leads to relational resentment and mistrust.

Glenn T. Stanton, "The Ring Makes All the Difference," p.62

A True Solder

The true soldier fights not because he hates what is in front of him, but because he loves what is behind him.

G.K. Chesterton

A Nation Cannot Survive Treason

HT to J.L. Pattison

Selling Souls for for Full Bellies

The Dragons in Our Culture

Dragons have a preference for the virgin flesh of maidens because they are not merely hungry but wicked. They desire the defilement of the pure and undefiled, the destruction of the virgin. Their devouring is a deflowering.  Parallels with human “dragons” in our own world are not difficult to discern. The war against the dragon is not, therefore, a war against a physical monster, like a dinosaur, but a battle against the wickedness we see around us in our everyday lives. We all face our daily dragons and we must all defend ourselves from them and hopefully slay them, which is only possible with the assistance of God’s grace which serves as a sort of St. George in the heart of man. The sobering reality is that we must either fight the dragons that we encounter in life or become dragons ourselves. There is no middle-path. No neutrality in this fight to the death is possible. We either fight the dragon or we become the dragon.

An additional problem is that we live in a dragon-culture, a culture of death, which pours scorn on the very concept of virtue and which has banned the very concept of “sin” from its vocabulary. Purity is equated with puritanism and is shunned. Chastity is ridiculed. And true marriage, in which the sexual union is united with the self-sacrificial desire for children, is being ripped apart. To make matters worse, Pride, the wickedest of sins, which rules the heart of every dragon, is now unfurled as an infernal banner and held aloft as a sign of the dragon’s war on Christian humility.

Joseph Pearce, “Rescuing Our Maidens from the Culture of Death.”  

Read the whole article!!

Coexist?

The Idea That Truth Is Not Absolute, But Relative, is a LIE

After undergoing relentless indoctrination by popular culture—movies, popular music, sitcom television programs, and network news, etc.—most Americans (yes, even many Christians) have become moral relativists, believing we ought not make any judgments at all on moral grounds.  Adultery, living together without benefit of marriage, homosexuality, no-fault divorce—all of these things are either protected “personal choices” or issues a person is seen as having no control over—“they were born that way”—and who are we to judge?  American sense of fairness has been exploited by “multicultural” moral relativists bent on brainwashing us to believe all personal choices are equal—that there are no truly right or wrong choices or lifestyles, just “different strokes for different folks.” . . .

While Americans generally may no longer hold tightly to “morality” in the sense that it was understood 50 years ago—i.e. chastity outside of marriage, marital fidelity, etc., we struggle valiantly to hold to our “values.”  We believe the powerful should not exploit the average man—think Enron.  The strong should not subjugate the weak—think rape and incest.  Minorities and women should be protected from the presumably racist, sexist majority.  The old should have their Medicare, the young should be provided with a good education. The handicapped should have special parking privileges, and slow learners should have Special Ed.  And perhaps our strongest value:  All children (those born at least) should be protected—from sexual predators to schoolyard bullies to low self-esteem. Yet, with Christianity discredited and Darwinian Evolution as the underpinning of our secular culture, we have no real basis for the “values” we hold dear, based, as they were, on “old-fashioned” biblical morality.  As the late, very popular evolutionist Stephen J. Gould pointed out in the PBS documentary A Glorious Accident, morals and values are about “oughts,” and the evolutionary process is not about “oughts.”  In Darwinian Evolution, the only thing that matters is surviving and reproducing.  The strong subjugate the weak, and that’s all there is to it. Nothing is right and nothing is wrong; nature knows only predator and prey. Yet, the majority of Americans accept as fact that we are mere products of evolution—that we clawed our way up the evolutionary chain by killing or subjugating the weak; but they also suppose we “ought” to behave in certain civilized ways that fly in the face of that belief!

Don and Joy Veinot, America At War With Herself, Midwest Christian Outreach blog

Roe v. Wade Unconstitutional

Roe v. Wade is the worst decision ever made by the Supreme Court.  It is the worst in terms of moral theory for obvious reasons.  The Court held that killing children in the name of freedom for women was more important than the freedom of the baby to live.  This decision is the worst in terms of constitutional theory as well.  The Justices really made a legislative decision, not a constitutional decision.  In order to make a constitutional decision, the Court has to base its decision on something written down in the Constitution.  There is nothing written in the Constitution which relates at all to a woman’s so-called “right to an abortion.”  Since the Court could not base its decision on any written provision in the Constitution, it is fair to conclude that seven Justices simply decided that abortion laws were bad laws.  Just as we believe the Bible (God’s written law) should guide our moral decision, so the written words of the Constitution should guide our Constitutional decisions and opinions.

Michael Farris, Esq., Constitutional Law for Christian Students, p.114

Comment:  This was written in 1995, but the Court’s ruling that same-sex fake marriage is a Constitutional right is just as much of a travesty as Roe v. Wade insofar as its destruction of society and for all the same reasons as Roe V. Wade.