Friday, May 20, 2016

One more reason to never shop at this store

When a young girl gets stabbed in a store, and a good samaritan literally jumps in to help, he is a hero, right? Not at Target. They are suing the good samaritan. You can see a video of the incident here along with an article on the details of the situation.

Should we be surprised though? This is the same store who doesn't care that women may have to share restrooms with grown men pretending to be women/transgenders to gain access to spaces that should be private. It should be no shock then to learn that Target executives don't think women should even be defended while they are being brutally stabbed.

How things change. It wasn't too long ago that the homosexual community demanded boycotts of Target because it was discovered the corporation had donated money to a conservative politician's campaign. Did the pressure not end there perhaps? Just what type of threats and bullying might Target be enduring to make them make such a drastic change in how they treat their customers?

Whatever may be going on behind the scenes, Target's actions depict a complete disregard for women, bordering on hatred. They love the money they get from women though. It's time to stop giving them a single dime.



Tuesday, May 17, 2016

Black leaders find WH transgender agenda insulting

The fight to allow men in women's restrooms and changing rooms is being hailed as the new "civil rights" battle of our time. But several black leaders are offended at the comparison.

As reported in One News Now, ''...Americans are being asked to believe that the effort to normalize and legitimize transgenderism is the same as the long struggle for civil rights in the U.S. American Family Association's public policy analyst Abraham Hamilton III says they're nothing alike.

'There has not been one individual who's been lynched for being transgender in America. There's not one person who's been pulled over for driving while transgender. That doesn't happen,' says Hamilton. 'There's not been one person who's had dogs 'sicced' on them by police [for being transgender]. Those things are not synonymous.'

Derryck Green, a member of the national advisory council of the Project 21 black leadership network, concurs.

'The physical and emotional abuse blacks endured under segregation, on a good day, are in no way analogous to the adulation and 'rights' that those who suffer from gender dysphoria are experiencing and receiving,' he states. 'For the Obama administration to say as much insults the intelligence, and brazenly disrespects the tradition of, the black civil rights movement.'

Hamilton points out that the civil rights struggle was led by the church – a clarion moral call that he says is lacking today.

'The failure of black leaders to stand up and destroy the notion that this homosexual and sexual deviancy agenda is synonymous with the civil rights struggle has helped allow this agenda to not only progress but to grow legs and run,' he tells OneNewsNow.

The federal government gives Title I funds to more than 50,000 schools across the nation, which in turn provide things like after-school and summer programs and remedial education, not to mention free and reduced-cost meals to more than 21 million low-income students per year. The administration's mandate (issued last week) for all public schools to allow children into opposite-sex bathrooms carries with it the threat to withhold those funds.

AFA's Hamilton says that's just about the only club the Obama administration has to force schools to allow cross-gender use of school restrooms and locker rooms. 'The president is effectively snatching food out of the mouths of students should the schools not capitulate to his radical, social reengineering, sexual deviancy agenda,' says the policy analyst – adding that he's disgusted President Obama is using mostly minority schools as a social-engineering petri dish.

'Not only does the president support this radical LGBTQ agenda, he's now forcing America's parents and their children to embrace it...' "

But for Americans to reject this radical agenda, Americans first need to realize what is going on. For starters, to equate an identity issue with issues faced by an entire race is a slap in the face to our black brothers and sisters. 

Second, every parent with a child in any public school needs to make their concerns known and refuse to allow their children to not only be subjected to an invasion of privacy with these dangerous bathroom policies, but also to refuse to allow that their kids be indoctrinated into a culture that aims to confuse children who are, by nature, vulnerable and impressionable. 

I'm glad I grew up at a time when it was still OK to go through natural phases. As a young girl, I climbed trees, had my share of daredevil bike accidents, and during summer at our family cottage, I collected live bait in the mornings for my daily fishing excursions off the dock. Boys, by the way, were much more "icky" at that time than anything I found crawling under the rocks that could be used to catch fish.  

By the time I was about 14, suddenly boys were looking a lot better than bait, but if I were that same "tomboy" in today's culture, would I be encouraged to consider that I might have gender identity issues? Would I then begin to think I did have such issues, when the thought never had entered my mind beforehand? I shudder to think how many kids these days are being propagandized toward an identity, rather than being left to their own devices to go through the natural phases of growing up. 

Studies show that the majority of kids with "gender identity" issues outgrow them by the time they finish puberty. For those who don't outgrow it and who have a genuine disorder, they deserve dignity and help. But most children in general would never experience any such issue. How unfair that we are pushing this transgender agenda on the youngest and most impressionable among us in ways that could cause a confusion that would never have existed in the first place if nature were just allowed to take its course. 

Tuesday, May 10, 2016

Illegal immigrants demand changes to "scary" Park Ranger uniforms

As reported in the Common Constitutionalist, "National Parks, originally known as Federal Reserves, has been in existence for well over 100 years with the first recognized in 1872 – that being Yellowstone. Back then there was really no one to look after the park – no National Park Service – no Park Rangers.

In 1886 Congress decided to charge the military with the task of overlooking and protecting Yellowstone, but they were not really equipped or trained to do the job properly. So on August 25, 1916, the Park Ranger Service was born.

Prior to the military influence, those who loosely patrolled Yellowstone dressed in civilian attire, but since then, those who have looked after our National Parks have always been in uniform. And up until recently, this has been just fine.

But then again, many things have been just fine until the relatively recent rise of over-sensitive leftism. Nowadays, there is almost nothing that won’t somehow offend a liberal or a protected group – and it seems the Park Rangers have done just that.

The Park Rangers have offended someone, but not just anyone or any single individual. It seems the Rangers have offended and are said to be scaring an entire race of people. After 100 years of Park Ranger uniforms not offending anyone, it seems now the “Latino Community” has a palpable fear of them.

We know this because Maite Arce, the designated representative of the Hispanic Access Foundation (HAF) who promotes the causes of Latino-only illegal aliens, says so.

Now what could possibly be her and her group’s concern? It seems Park Ranger uniforms too closely resemble those of the border patrol and I.C.E. agents.

So free access to healthcare, a free K-12 education, in state college tuition, welfare and a myriad of other perks isn’t enough. Now the National Park Service must change their uniforms to accommodate people who shouldn’t be here because they are scared by the way the Rangers are dressed?

Arce says that, “We are calling for drastic change. One example I can give you is with the Latino community, especially among the border states, but even nationwide, just the simple color of the uniforms that rangers wear. It’s such a shame that something as simple as the uniform and its similarity to the border patrol's uniform – in the coloring – could be very threatening to certain segments of the Latino population.”

Of course it’s not one example – it’s the only example and we all know what “certain segments of the Latino population” she is referring to – the only “segment” who might be concerned with being caught and deported. Sadly I don’t know where this fear originates from because I.C.E. and the border patrol are under orders to catch and release if they even do catch. So why on Earth should illegals fear the Park Rangers?

But just in case they do have their feelings hurt by the sight of a mean old Ranger, the HAF along with other groups and pandering liberal lawmakers are asking Obama to issue an Executive Order for changes to be made.

Among the suggestions are to “assess the cultural implications of existing agency uniforms, offices, signage, and other facilities. For example, the Park Service law-enforcement vehicles look like those used by U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, and uniforms have law enforcement connotations, both of which present a significant impediment to engaging all Americans.”

There is one problem with that statement: “Americans” don’t have a fear of the Park Rangers, or their uniforms, or their vehicles, or the offices, or the signage because as Americans, we have no reason to fear them." Maybe if immigrants who want to come to America would do so the legal way - and they would be welcomed with open arms - they would have no reason to fear either.

It's just a little frustrating to see lawbreakers making demands like this. When our own US Veterans are getting fewer benefits than the average illegal border crosser, it's a little much to take. 






Wednesday, May 4, 2016

Eradicating evil starts with recognizing human dignity

Last Friday night I had the wonderful opportunity of attending an event in Ann Arbor to hear David Daleiden speak. David is the extremely courageous man who went undercover to expose the heinous evil of Planned Parenthood's practice of selling aborted babies for profit. In his defense of the dignity of life, Daleiden is now the focus of felony charges - a sadly typical turning of the tables in today's culture of death.

For those who are determined to believe that it was all an elaborate, edited ruse, I invite you to watch his talk from Friday night and determine for yourself if you still believe he was just out to falsely discredit anyone. 

It's important to keep in mind that evil isn't just manifest in the actions of Planned Parenthood. It slithers into mindsets so as to blind some to the truth, rendering them almost incapable of seeing what is right in front of them. If only the blinders would be removed so that we can all, once and for all, call out evil for what it is and where it is and stand for all life. Until that day, though, I commend David Daleiden and others like him for their willingness to take on this giant form of evil in our society.

In other news, last night I attended a "Celebrate Life" banquet for a pro-life group on whose Board I sit. In the midst of all the evil being perpetrated on us by the likes of Planned Parenthood and elsewhere, it was edifying to be surrounded by so many men and women who recognize, value and fight for the sanctity of all human life, from conception to natural death.

The entertainment for the night was comedian David Dean. I have to say it was refreshing to hear a comedy-bit devoid of the filth and vulgarity you get so often these days - not only from comedians but from all over. It amazes me how casually people drop certain "letter" bombs, in every form of speech, even if they don't know you. From strangers standing in line with you at the beer counter at a Tigers game, to people at the next table at a restaurant, it both stuns and saddens me to hear the lack of decorum used in everyday language. 

I recently overheard some young women next to me in a dressing room speaking in such a vulgar manner that I couldn't help but gently admonish them through the wall about their language (and then, of course, immediately realized the chances of later getting my hyde kicked in the parking lot as a result). They responded through the wall with the overly used and under-thought responses of "hey, it's a free country" and the like. But when I told them they were worth more than that and to not be so willing to squander their dignity, they quieted right down - as if something actually hit home. And I made it through the parking lot without a hitch.

Maybe that's where it should all begin: reminding young people - or simply teaching them in the first place - about their God-given dignity. I wonder, in this culture of anything goes, where young people are learning about true self-respect. I don't mean the "self-esteem" movement that teaches young people they are the center of the universe - I mean teaching them about the true worth and dignity that comes from the Creator of the universe. 

Perhaps if we zero in on young people's true worth - their God-given dignity - life itself would take on more value, and through that, we would see a precipitous decline in things like abortion, suicide and the rising practice of euthanasia. Maybe we'd even see a decline in the cussing crudeness found in everyday conversation all too often. I am not saying that users of vulgarity automatically condone things like abortion - of course not - I'm merely concerned about when it is that young people today are taught about the value of their own lives and all human life in general.

One ray of hope toward this end happened at another recent event I attended - my goddaughter's First Holy Communion this past Saturday. To see all those young people dressed in their finest and praising God the way they did for us in a pre-Mass performance gives me hope. Thanks to their parents who are seeing to it, these youngsters are being taught the faith, and through that, are more likely to know the infinite importance of God - and of the dignity and value of human life that He himself gave us. Only by starting there can we hope to turn things around for the better.

Saturday, April 23, 2016

Now that Scalia is gone, we can gut the 2nd Amendment

Chelsea Clinton said Thursday at an event in Maryland that there is now an opportunity for gun control legislation to pass the Supreme Court now that Justice Antonin Scalia has passed away. “It matters to me that my mom also recognizes the role the Supreme Court has when it comes to gun control. With Justice Scalia on the bench, one of the few areas where the Court actually had an inconsistent record relates to gun control,” Clinton said. “Sometimes the Court upheld local and state gun control measures as being compliant with the Second Amendment and sometimes the Court struck them down.”

Clinton then touted her mother’s record on gun control issues and knowledge that the Supreme Court has an effect on whether many gun control laws stand. “So if you listen to Moms Demand Action and the Brady Campaign and the major efforts pushing for smart, sensible and enforceable gun control across our country, disclosure, have endorsed my mom, they say they believe the next time the Court rules on gun control, it will make a definitive ruling,” Clinton said. “So it matters to me that my mom is the only person running for president who not only constantly makes that connection but also has a strong record on gun control and standing up to the NRA.”

Apparently the younger Clinton forgets that, in her hopes that her mom will be the next president, that all presidents take an oath to uphold the Constitution, not use the Supreme Court to gut it. Besides, the Supreme Court cannot amend the Constitution - only uphold it. It takes two thirds of Congress and three quarters of the states to amend the Constitution. Then again, the left has been using the Supreme Court as its own personal agenda pusher in areas that it cannot succeed in through the legislative process. Why doesn’t it surprise me that another liberal like Chelsea Clinton would talk about stacking the Supreme Court in a way that suits their agenda, not in a way that would uphold the Constitution?

Monday, April 18, 2016

"College kids say the darndest things: On identity"

When we cannot call a spade a spade, literally, we are in a freefall from reality. Does anyone think that's a good thing? Apparently these college kids do. But don't ask them to give a straight answer about reality. The poor things seem terrified to even entertain the idea that facts are facts, let alone assert one as such. I worry about these young people. They have been so mislead.

Watch this video for the sad reality on the denial of reality.

Sigh....

Wednesday, April 13, 2016

A couple encouraging nods to "freedom of religion"

In a surprising revision coming from the Obama administration, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) has changed its wording on religious freedom in its naturalization test materials. The DHS recently granted a request from Sen. James Lankford (R-Okla.) to change the words “freedom of worship” to “freedom of religion” in relation to First Amendment rights.

Lankford wrote to the Obama administration last year, explaining how the words used to describe religious freedom on the naturalization tests, which were changed in 2008, were not inclusive enough. He wrote, “Not only is ‘freedom of worship’ inconsistent with the text of the Amendment proposed 226 years ago today, saying that ‘freedom of worship’ is more inclusive than ‘freedom of religion’ flies in the face of a pillar upon which our entire nation was founded.”

The senator went on to write, “Our forefathers came to America to have freedom of religion, not simply freedom of worship. … Worship confines you to a location. Freedom of religion is the right to exercise your religious beliefs  it is the ability for Americans to live out their faith or to choose to have no faith at all.”

Lankford demanded an immediate change of wording, and even though the DHS originally declined his request, upon further review they concluded that it was “feasible.”

This is a change for the Obama administration as the president has repeatedly used the words “freedom of worship” in his public speeches instead of “freedom of religion.”

Senator Lankford praised the decision, saying, “I applaud the Department of Homeland Security for listening to me and deciding to change their material to reflect our First Amendment right of freedom of religion,” said Lankford. “At first glance, it appears like a small matter, but it is actually an important distinction for the Constitution and the First Amendment. The ‘freedom of religion’ language reflects our right to live a life of faith at all times, while the ‘freedom of worship’ reflects a right simply confined to a particular space and location.”

In another area, a federal court has  thrown out an ACLU lawsuit that sought to force hospitals operated by Trinity Health to commit abortions, regardless of their religious and pro-life objections.

I know there are still many issues to combat regarding religious freedom in the public square, but I welcome these rays of light where we can get them.