Dove takes a dive into the absurd

Have you seen Dove's latest commercial? The really disturbing one promoting its new product line, Baby Dove? The one that features young women sharing their views of mothering? The one that shows a cross-dressing father trying to pass himself off as a "real mom" and who tells us that when it comes to mothering, “There’s no one right way to do it all"? Yeah, that's the one.

As an alert from One Million Moms reports, "The ad begins with the ironic words, “'Moms are redefining what it means to be a ‘good mom.’” And then while showcasing all kinds of 'mothers', a male grad student 'Shea' proclaims that he and his wife — who is the actual biological mom but never speaks during the commercial — are both 'moms' of their newborn son. The man in the ad is actually the baby's biological father dressed as one of the moms, saying he is the baby's mom.

First, what an incredible insult to actual women who long to have children, but for whatever reason, cannot or have not had children. Second, what an outrageous lie Dove is shoving in our faces. All the makeup, high heels and body-disfiguring surgeries in the world cannot and do not change a man's chromosome-based identity.

And what about this baby's father? He has essentially been abandoned by his dad, who believes a father is not important, and that two "moms" will be better for this child. How selfish and misguided a message Dove is sending.

While celebrating this man's own narcissistic and disordered desires, “Shea” (and Dove) ignores both the needs and future desires of his son who will indeed long for a father who rejoices in his role as a father. His son will long for a father who isn’t a public spectacle. And his son will need a father to be a role model for him, to show him the way to become a man and to teach him to love his own maleness. “Shea” will instead teach his son to be ashamed of and guilty about his own natural and proper feelings of sorrow for his missing father.

'Shea’s'delusional belief that he can be a woman and a mother suggests the absurd idea that belief can alter reality. The message of the ad is that good mothers are those who fully embrace their own selfish desires and their own internal sense of right, wrong, and reality. The ad does nothing to underscore the unchangeable reality that, at the very least, a 'good mother' requires that one be biologically female. The ad concludes with the audacious and ironic words: 'To #RealMoms everywhere.'"

How degrading to actual real moms everywhere. Shame on Dove for spreading such filthy lies that can only further damage our already suffering culture.

Earth Day doomsday predictions that never came to pass

The following article is from energy and science reporter, Andrew Follett, published by The Daily Caller (and sent to me by my favorite cousin:-). Being that today is Earth Day, I thought today would be the perfect day to share it. Yes, we should all respect the planet, e.g. don't litter, etc., but we should never allow ourselves to become hysterical about it like the alarmists are, and should never turn the planet into something to worship. In other words, let's keep things in perspective. Happy Earth Day!

From Andrew Follett:

Environmentalists truly believed and predicted during the first Earth Day in 1970 that the planet was doomed unless drastic actions were taken.

Humanity never quite got around to that drastic action, but environmentalists still recall the first Earth Day fondly and hold many of the predictions in high regard.

So this Earth Day, The Daily Caller News Foundation takes a look at predictions made by environmentalists around the original Earth Day in 1970 to see how they’ve held up.

Have any of these dire predictions come true? No, but that hasn’t stopped environmentalists from worrying.

1: “Civilization Will End Within 15 Or 30 Years”

Harvard biologist Dr. George Wald warned shortly before the first Earth Day in 1970 that civilization would soon end “unless immediate action is taken against problems facing mankind.” Three years before his projection, Wald was awarded the Nobel Prize for Physiology or Medicine.

Wald was a vocal opponent of the Vietnam War and the nuclear arms race. He even flew to Moscow at one point to advise the leader of the Soviet Union on environmental policy.

Despite his assistance to a communist government, civilization still exists. The percentage of Americans who are concerned about environmental threats has fallen as civilization failed to end by environmental catastrophe.

2: “100-200 Million People Per Year Will Be Starving To Death During The Next Ten Years”

Stanford professor Dr. Paul Ehrlich declared in April 1970 that mass starvation was imminent. His dire predictions failed to materialize as the number of people living in poverty has significantly declined and the amount of food per person has steadily increased, despite population growth. The world’s Gross Domestic Product per person has immeasurably grown despite increases in population.

Ehrlich is largely responsible for this view, having co-published “The Population Bomb” with The Sierra Club in 1968. The book made a number of claims including that millions of humans would starve to death in the 1970s and 1980s, mass famines would sweep England leading to the country’s demise, and that ecological destruction would devastate the planet causing the collapse of civilization.

3: “Population Will Inevitably And Completely Outstrip Whatever Small Increases In Food Supplies We Make”

Paul Ehrlich also made the above claim in 1970, shortly before an agricultural revolution that caused the world’s food supply to rapidly increase.

Ehrlich has consistently failed to revise his predictions when confronted with the fact that they did not occur, stating in 2009 that “perhaps the most serious flaw in The Bomb was that it was much too optimistic about the future.”

4: “Demographers Agree Almost Unanimously … Thirty Years From Now, The Entire World … Will Be In Famine”

Environmentalists in 1970 truly believed in a scientific consensus predicting global famine due to population growth in the developing world, especially in India.

“Demographers agree almost unanimously on the following grim timetable: by 1975 widespread famines will begin in India; these will spread by 1990 to include all of India, Pakistan, China and the Near East, Africa. By the year 2000, or conceivably sooner, South and Central America will exist under famine conditions,” Peter Gunter, a professor at North Texas State University, said in a 1970 issue of The Living Wilderness.”By the year 2000, thirty years from now, the entire world, with the exception of Western Europe, North America, and Australia, will be in famine.”

India, where the famines were supposed to begin, recently became one of the world’s largest exporters of agricultural products and food supply per person in the country has drastically increased in recent years. In fact, the number of people in every country listed by Gunter has risen dramatically since 1970.

5: “In A Decade, Urban Dwellers Will Have To Wear Gas Masks To Survive Air Pollution”

Life magazine stated in January 1970 that scientist had “solid experimental and theoretical evidence” to believe that “in a decade, urban dwellers will have to wear gas masks to survive air pollution…by 1985 air pollution will have reduced the amount of sunlight reaching Earth by one half.”

Despite the prediction, air quality has been improving worldwide, according to the World Health Organization. Air pollution has also sharply declined in industrialized countries. Carbon dioxide (CO2), the gas environmentalists are worried about today, is odorless, invisible and harmless to humans in normal amounts.

6: “Childbearing [Will Be] A Punishable Crime Against Society, Unless The Parents Hold A Government License”

David Brower, the first executive director of The Sierra Club made the above claim and went on to say that “[a]ll potential parents [should be] required to use contraceptive chemicals, the government issuing antidotes to citizens chosen for childbearing.” Brower was also essential in founding Friends of the Earth and the League Of Conservation Voters and much of the modern environmental movement.

Brower believed that most environmental problems were ultimately attributable to new technology that allowed humans to pass natural limits on population size. He famously stated before his death in 2000 that “all technology should be assumed guilty until proven innocent” and repeatedly advocated for mandatory birth control.

Today, the only major government to ever get close to his vision has been China, which ended its one-child policy last October.

7: “By The Year 2000 … There Won’t Be Any More Crude Oil”

On Earth Day in 1970 ecologist Kenneth Watt famously predicted that the world would run out of oil saying, “You’ll drive up to the pump and say, ‘Fill ‘er up, buddy,’ and he’ll say, ‘I am very sorry, there isn’t any.’”

Numerous academics like Watt predicted that American oil production peaked in 1970 and would gradually decline, likely causing a global economic meltdown. However, the successful application of massive hydraulic fracturing, or fracking, caused American oil production to come roaring back and there is currently too much oil on the market.

American oil and natural gas reserves are at their highest levels since 1972 and American oil production in 2014 was 80 percent higher than in 2008 thanks to fracking.

Furthermore, the U.S. now controls the world’s largest untapped oil reserve, the Green River Formation in Colorado. This formation alone contains up to 3 trillion barrels of untapped oil shale, half of which may be recoverable. That’s five and a half times the proven reserves of Saudi Arabia. This single geologic formation could contain more oil than the rest of the world’s proven reserves combined.

Why the silence on Christian genocide? No surprise here...

America's media tend to show outrage over a lot of things - like an airline passenger being hauled of a plane, or when Assad is accused of being worse than Hitler. The Islamic terror attack on the Brussels airport last year, killing more than 30 people, was covered by our media day and night, with footage from the blast shown over and over by the hour. And the Islamic terror attack in France, when a driver plowed his truck into hundreds of people in Nice, also received day and night coverage.

Yet, when forty-five Egyptian Christians were slaughtered by ISIS while attending church services on Palm Sunday recently, with scores of others wounded, there was barely a blip in our media. Some people may sk, how can this be? For the last decade, a Christian genocide has been taking place in the Middle East, representing one of the ugliest chapters in recent human history, yet the secular media are silent.

ISIS wants Christianity eradicated, and they want to convert all Muslims to their crusade. They want it to be a holy war. They want Christians gone. We’re talking about hundreds of thousands of Christians being displaced, exiled, attacked, maimed, tortured, starved and killed. We’re talking about a crisis of epic proportions, yet the news coverage of this ongoing tragedy receives is negligible.

So why isn’t that narrative getting the attention it should get in the American media? Some say it’s because what happens in the Middle East is common, and therefore, simply doesn’t inspire interest in the American media as it does for events in more “westernized” regions like France or Brussels. But my guess as to why the American media don’t report on the atrocities occurring against Christians is simply because American media members are largely anti-Christian and anti-liberty. Period. They’re Marxists, as communistic as academia, and by extension, they’re walking right in line with today’s satanic – godless – globalist agenda. There’s not much more mystery to the media’s silence than that. But I'm interested in hearing if there are other reasons for their silence that perhaps I'm just not seeing...

Protecting goats good; babies bad

From LifeNews.com:

The saga of David Daleiden and the Center for Medical Progress continues to shed new light on the darkness of Planned Parenthood and its political accomplices. The filing of criminal charges in California on March 28 against Mr. Daleiden and Sandra Merritt opened a new window, revealing how tightly some politicians on the left are locked in the grip of Big Abortion.

The new Attorney General of California, Xavier Becerra, has received campaign funds from Planned Parenthood’s deep pockets and was publicly acclaimed by Planned Parenthood when he recently was appointed. In less than two months after taking office as the AG, he filed 15 felony counts against the individuals who exposed Planned Parenthood’s criminality.

Let's put this into perspective. Mr. Daleiden’s alleged “crime” is that he recorded abortionists discussing their activities without them knowing they were being recorded. Abortionists were recorded discussing the process of dismembering infants in the womb and then selling their body parts for a profit. If proven in court, that would be a federal felony under 42 U.S.C. § 289g-2.

Even if the California Attorney General could prove his case of improper recording against Mr. Daleiden and Ms. Merritt, this would be a minor offense and dubious charge at worst. Under the laws of 38 other states, as well the federal government, it would not be a crime at all. Only in California and 11 other states do both parties to a conversation need to know the recording is occurring.

Even in California, this anti-recording law is honored in its breach. Journalists in California routinely conduct undercover video stings and do not get charged with a crime.

A well-known animal protection group called Mercy for Animals regularly sends undercover videographers, using aliases, to expose conduct of which it disapproves. In one of its many undercover videos, the group’s undercover videographer gained access to a goat slaughterhouse by posing as a prospective meat buyer. After the videotape was publicized, California law enforcement authorities prosecuted the goat slaughterer for animal cruelty, not the undercover reporter.

So what is the moral of the story? If you are an undercover reporter against goat slaughtering, you get applauded and not prosecuted. If you are an undercover reporter against slaughtering human children and the trafficking of their body parts, you get prosecuted while those slaughtering and trafficking do not.

Apparently in California, you only get prosecuted for undercover video stings if you hold views disfavored by the political elite, particularly when you embarrass the money-flush, politically powerful Goliath of abortion.

And that is why this most recent twist in the Daleiden saga is an eye-opener. It hearkens an idea, loosely paraphrased, attributed to our patron saint at the Thomas More Society: if you cut down the laws in order to destroy your political opponents, what remains to protect the culture left standing from unbridled political power? Perhaps Mr. Becerra should think about that.

Help David Defeat Goliath....

Today, April 11, at 9 pm ET, join David Daleiden — the heroic undercover investigator who exposed Planned Parenthood’s barbaric aborted baby body parts business — for an urgent LIVE online event to learn about the latest attacks from the abortion giant and its political puppets … and what’s needed right now to turn the tide and win this epic struggle against Planned Parenthood. Register for free here.

Talk about closing the gate after the horse escapes...

Here is a quote from a Target rep in response to a man caught filming a woman under the women's dressing room door at Target in Knoxville: "As soon as this incident was brought to our attention, we immediately partnered with local law enforcement.” 

Just think, Target, if you didn't allow men to use the women's dressing rooms and women's restrooms, this more than likely wouldn't have happened in the first place. The rep's words are nothing more than an attempt to close the gate after the horse runs away.

By the way, this is not a statement against transgenders as that is not what concerns me in particular. What concerns me is that creeps like this man who can take advantage of Target’s "inclusive" policy because the store chain now has no say in keeping men out of women's places.

But who cares about our safety as long as Target (and other retailers who have jumped on this bandwagon) can appear to be politically correct at the cost of common sense, privacy and safety. I miss Target actually, but I haven't shopped there since I stopped feeling safe there, not to mention that I just cannot financially support places that blatantly disregard the well-being of the many over the few. I don't see places like Target doing anything other than reporting incidents after the fact, rather than doing all in their power to prevent them in the first place. What a shame and what a disappointment.

It seems that some female customers of these sorts of places have not received the truth yet: You do not have any assured privacy any longer in changing rooms or restrooms at places like Target. Many women, however, do already have that information and have made the quality decision not to shop at places that value their image in the eyes of powerful activists more than the safety of girls and women who want to try on clothes or go to the restroom without having a man standing there, or worse. Hopefully, as more women realize the truth, they will express their concerns by closing their wallets to these places.

Target has already lost billions in stock value and millions in revenue in sales in stores since implementing its ‘inclusive’ dressing room and bathroom policy, despite its claims that the two are unrelated. Maybe it will take the stock slipping so low that Target will actually consider putting safety first to bring back their value. Until then, we should continue sending Target the message of what really matters most.