Obama's State of the Dis-Union pits men against women

In his State of the Union Address last night, President Barack Obama's otherwise lackluster speech still managed to stir emotions - of the negative type - by pitting men against women. After all, what does the president like better than making people angry at each other? In this case, he pulled out the old gender pay gap myth.

Though there is a widespread perception that women are paid less than men on average, the perception goes wrong in thinking that such pay disparity is about cases when a woman doing the exact same job as a man for the same hours, in the same company or industry is paid less than her male co-worker. That is not, however, where the disparity lies. The "pay gap" simply looks at the median earnings of all men and women who are full-time workers, and because the average of men's earnings skew higher, feminists cry discrimination. But were they to take a closer look at the facts, they'd have to recant their accusation.

The fact is, men and women make different career choices for different reasons. A U.S. Department of Labor study found the average full-time working man works 8.14 hours a day, compared to 7.75 hours for the full-time working woman. Naturally, this would result in the man making more money.

Even more to the point, the natural differences between men and women result in different priorities, and therefore, different job ambitions. Women in general tend to seek jobs that offer comfortable and safe working conditions. In particular, women with children tend to choose lower paying jobs in return for companies that offer work-life balance packages that allow them to be more available for their children. Fathers, on the other hand, tend to seek work that can best support their families, which often means longer hours.

Men also are much more likely to take on dangerous or physically demanding jobs that most women simply don't want to do. You don't see many women working on oil rigs, construction sites, coal mines or the like. These jobs pay more because it's difficult to find people who are able and willing to do them. People crying discrimination need to understand that the oft-repeated statistic that women make on average "70 cents on the dollar compared to men" simply reflects an overall average of all pay for all jobs across the board.

But what do logic and facts matter when Obama can take an opportunity to divide us? He's doing it with race and class. Why not add a fight between men and women into the mix as well?

What do you think?  Click on the comments link in the bar below to share your thoughts. No registration necessary.

New York leadership to conservatives: Leave.

Newly elected New York Mayor, Bill de Blasio, told reporters today at the US Conference of Mayors in Washington, DC, that he completely agrees with New York Governor Andrew Cuomo's recent remarks that "extreme" conservatives don't belong in New York.

"I stand by that 100 percent," de Blasio said.

According to Cuomo, "extreme" conservatives are those who believe in the right to life, the right to self-defense, and in traditional marriage - and that there is no place for them in the state of New York.

Apparently ending human life in the womb, even in the ninth month,  allowing criminals to have free reign over us, and suppressing people's religious beliefs is not extreme.

I used to live in New York. I guess I'm not welcome there anymore. So much for the tolerant, accepting, freedom-loving left.

What do you think?  Click on the comments link in the bar below to share your thoughts. No registration necessary.

Is President Obama using black people for political gain?

President Barack Obama's election in 2008 was heralded as a sign that racism could truly be put to rest in America. Yet one of the first things Obama did as President in February 2009 was to cancel the D.C. Opportunity Scholarship Program, a successful voucher program that provides scholarships to low-income children – many of whom are black – to attend their school of choice. Essentially what Obama told these young black children hoping to get a better future is, "I don't think you should have it." 

Also, just last year, Obama supported Eric Holder in his lawsuit against Louisiana for its school voucher program that helps poor black children to escape failing schools in order to get a better education.

In the hypocrisy that has become his mantle, Obama gave a speech last week extolling the virtues of higher education. Too bad he doesn't think underprivileged children deserve to get a good primary education. 

Of course, that may be part of the plan. After all, if black people can't escape from terrible schools, their employment prospects will be awful. They likely will be welfare-dependent, and therefore reliable Democratic voters for decades to come. We already have record numbers of welfare participants, and Obama announced recently he wants to expand the welfare state, a.k.a. his voting base.

By his actions, it appears Obama thinks that keeping black people down will force them into government dependency, which will ensure their voting loyalty. And the fact that he takes every chance he can get to fan the flames of racism by telling the black community what victims they are of white society only ensures this loyalty, which in turn serves to keep the black population down.

As we prepare to acknowledge Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. Day, Obama's contrast to the civil rights leader is stark. Where Dr. King promoted the dignity of every human being regardless of skin color, Obama seems to want to capitalize on that skin color for his own political gain.

Way to use people, Mr. President. Too bad you didn't learn anything from the true role model we have in Dr. King.

What do you think?  Click on the comments link in the bar below to share your thoughts. No registration necessary.

What changed these people's minds on abortion in a matter of minutes?

Since the horrible ruling of Roe v. Wade almost 41 years ago to the day, over 55 million lives have been lost to abortion. But there are signs of hope that things can change. One is the increasingly large numbers of young people whose eyes are being opened to the lie that abortion is just a harmless choice. The growing numbers of young people attending the March for Life in D.C. each year is an indication of this.

Other hopeful signs include record numbers of abortion clinics that closed in 2013 - at least 44 closed - and abortions themselves have fallen from a high of 1.6 million in 1990 to 1.2 million in 2012. In addition to the surge in pro-life involvement of young people, these numbers may be due in part to new state laws that require clean facilities and access to hospitals should something go wrong during an abortion.

But there is something else making the rounds that may be having a larger impact than anyone knows. A short movie called "180" is the story of about eight people who all supported abortion, but who, upon seeing the movie, changed their minds in a matter of minutes to become pro-life. What is it about this short, 33-minute movie that changes these people's minds so quickly? You decide. Watch it here: http://180movie.com/

What do you think?  Click on the comments link in the bar below to share your thoughts. No registration necessary.

'Duck Dynasty' debacle shows left's complete intolerance & hypocrisy

During a GQ interview, "Duck Dynasty" patriarch Phil Robertson expressed his views on homosexuality, acknowledging his agreement with the Bible, which declares it a sin. He has now been suspended from the hit A&E show for his views.

In a statement, A&E said it was extremely disappointed to hear Robertson's remarks, which it said were based on his personal beliefs and do not reflect those of the A&E Network -- which considers itself a friend of the lesbian and gay community (it's just not a friend of different opinions, apparently). Human rights groups and GLAAD have also chimed in, slamming Robertson for his "vile" comments.

It's interesting, though, how we didn't hear human rights groups, N.O.W. or any other leftist group chime in when MSNBC host Martin Bashir said on air recently that someone should do unspeakable things in Sara Palin's mouth. Bashir has since resigned, but MSNBC gave him the dignity of remaining on air for two more weeks and allowed him to give a farewell statement, rather than firing him on the spot for his own vile comments.

But Bashir gets a pass in general by the mainstream media and others because his personal views are of the leftist variety in general. And as one sympathetic commentator put it, "while I don't agree with Bashir's statements, it is a free country."

Yes, it is a free country - for people like Bashir. But each day that passes it's becoming less of a free country for people like Robertson, whose views are based on Judeo-Christian principles not in line with the leftist world view of anything goes. Instead of tolerating people like Robertson - the left, who markets itself as the champion of tolerance - is waging a systematic silencing campaign against Robertson and anyone else who refuses to fall in line with leftist thinking.

Of course A&E has the right to fire Robertson if it chooses, but the fact that it's firing him simply for violating their stifling speech codes is what's so worrisome.

Consider the baker in Colorado who is being forced by a judge to bake wedding cakes for a same-sex couple, despite the fact it violates his Christian beliefs to do so. The Senate has voted for a bill that allows any homosexual who gets fired to sue for discrimination, regardless of the reason for his termination. Christian employers are being forced to provide for contraception and abortifacients that violate their faith teachings. The military is consistently trying to officially designate Christian evangelicals as a "hate group." San Antonio and other cities' anti-discrimination laws protect gays, but stifle Christians' free speech rights, while schools, cities and other public places are doing everything they can to ban Christmas - or anything Christian related - from even being mentioned.

A&E's actions against Robertson aren't so much a case of employer/employee disgruntlement as it is a very public example of how it feels Christians should be treated in general. While the network was happy to rake in millions of dollars off the popular Robertson show - of which the family's Christian principles are a centerpiece - for Robertson to express those beliefs anywhere else is grounds for termination. Why? Is A&E that afraid of gay activists who are furious that Robertson would dare to speak about his faith in a way that doesn't endorse homosexuality outright? It doesn't matter that Robertson also said we should love and respect homosexuals. The fact that he believes in Biblical teachings on it overall is the problem.

Where will it stop? As an increasing number of private corporations in a post-bailout era are dependent on government use of tax money in order to survive, consider how long it will be before a company's views on homosexuality will be a litmus test for how 'deserving' it is of government support. And as the increasingly bold speech-police state envelops this country, how much more common will it be that employees at these companies - a.k.a. private citizens - will be fired simply for speaking about their beliefs, while homosexuals are given preferential, protected treatment? 

Last time I checked, a free and mature country is one that allows for diverse views, beliefs and thoughts. But according to the supposedly tolerant left, freedom of speech only applies to the extent that you believe and think the same way they do. If you don't, and if you believe in Christian principles, be prepared for the forces of scorn to be unleashed upon you - and worse. The left says conservatives are the ones trying to force their morals on the country, but it is conservatives who are being forced to walk the "acceptable" leftist line, or else. 

What do you think?  Click on the comments link in the bar below to share your thoughts. No registration necessary.

iTunes approves "gay" app for children

Question: “If you’re gay and new to an area, how do you find out where gay people hang out?” Simple. Just get Distinc.tt, the newly approved app for iOS-based phones and tablets, now available in Apple’s iTunes for users 12 years old and older. Yes, 12 years old.

How does Distinc.tt work? It tracks users’ locations through GPS. This means your local friendly pedophile will know that a pre-teen child who has downloaded the app is at the mall, the arcade, the local movie theater, or any nearby location convenient to the pervert who’d like nothing more than to know where to find such young, impressionable kids.

Similar homosexual dating apps require users to be 18 years and above because the makers of these apps acknowledge they’re mostly used for arranging anonymous sexual encounters. But Apple has no problem allowing children to use it, even describing it as the only family-friendly “LGBT app that you can bring home to Mom,” according to Distinc.tt CEO Michael Belkin.

Unfortunately if Mom’s little loved one forgets to turn off the app’s tracking device, predators will know exactly where to find him or her.

While the app is also available for Google’s Android operating system, that company has limited its availability to users 18 and older. Only Apple has approved Distinc.tt for use by minor children. I’m sure NAMBLA members nationwide are rejoicing.

What do you think?  Click on the comments link in the bar below to share your thoughts. No registration necessary.

Do LGBT rights trump religious rights?

A Colorado judge ruled last week that a Christian baker should be forced to bake wedding cakes for same-sex couples despite the fact that homosexuality violates the baker's religious beliefs. The judge, Robert N. Spencer, also ruled that Jack Phillips, the owner of the Masterpiece Cakeshop in suburban Denver, will face fines if he continues to try to live his faith by turning away gay couples who want to buy wedding cakes.

"The undisputed facts show that Respondents (Phillips) discriminated against Complainants because of their sexual orientation by refusing to sell them a wedding cake for their same-sex marriage," Spencer wrote.

Last year, David Mullins and Charlie Craig visited the Masterpiece Cakeshop to order a cake for their upcoming wedding reception. The couple had planned to marry in Massachusetts and hold a reception in Colorado.

Phillips told the men that he could not bake their cake because of his religious beliefs opposing same-sex marriage. He offered to make them any other baked item, but not a wedding cake. Instead of going to any other bakery that would have baked them a cake, the couple opted to file a complaint with the Colorado Civil Rights Division.

"Being denied service by Masterpiece Cakeshop was offensive and dehumanizing especially in the midst of arranging what should be a joyful family celebration," Mullins said in a statement. "No one should fear being turned away from a public business because of who they are."

And nobody should fear the government's power to make us deny our deeply held religious beliefs either. But that's exactly what is happening (and not just in this baker's case, but in other cases around the country). What we're seeing is that homosexuals' rights are being given more credence than citizens' religious rights as guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution. 

Not surprisingly, the ACLU of Colorado is celebrating the judge's ruling as a major victory for "gay rights." 

"While we all agree that religious freedom is important, no one's religious beliefs make it acceptable to break the law by discriminating against prospective customers," ACLU staff attorney Amanda Goad said in a statement. "No one is asking Masterpiece's owners to change his beliefs, but treating gay people differently because of who they are is discrimination plain and simple."

Phillips was represented by the Alliance Defending Freedom, a legal firm specializing in religious liberty cases. Attorney Nicolle Martin condemned the judge's ruling.

"America was founded on the fundamental freedom of every citizen to live and work according to their beliefs," Martin said in a prepared statement. "Forcing Americans to promote ideas against their will undermines our constitutionally protected freedom of expression and our right to live free."

Martin said this was simply a case of a baker who declined to use his personal creative abilities to promote and endorse a same-sex ceremony. "If the government can take aware our First Amendment freedoms, there is nothing it can't take away," she said.

Martin added that Phillips is a devoted Christian who has an unwavering faith. She said he is a person of such deep faith that he won't even bake Halloween-themed treats – at all.

"He's just trying to live within a certain set of biblical principles because he believes that he answers to God for everything that he does," Martin said. "It sends a message not just to other business owners, it sends a message to Americans – that if the government can take away our First amendment freedoms and tell you what to say and when to say it, there's nothing they can't take away." 

Judge Spencer said Phillips did not demonstrate that his free speech rights had been violated and he said there's no evidence that forcing him to make a cake for a same-sex ceremony would hurt his business.

"On the contrary, to the extent that the law prohibits Respondents' (Phillips) from discriminating on the basis of sexual orientation, compliance with the law would likely increase their business by not alienating the gay community," he wrote.

But who is this judge to make decisions on what is and isn't good for anyone's business? And who is anyone in a position of public power to tell us we must sell goods & services that violate our conscience? 

While pro-homosexual defenders like to compare this case to the kind of discrimination that black Americans have experienced, they're overlooking one key thing: Nowhere in the Bible does it tell us that there is something wrong with being black, and therefore, to discriminate against a human being for the color of their skin is wrong. But in many places throughout the Bible, we're taught that homosexuality is an abomination.  

Yet the government is forcing us to abandon those beliefs by forcing us to take even a slight part in it -- and that is a serious problem that will only get worse if left unchecked. It doesn't take a lot of imagination to see where this trend is heading, including the attempt to force Catholic priests to perform same-sex "marriages". 

In the meantime, where are the lawsuits against Muslim taxi drivers who refuse to pick up passengers who are carrying unopened bottles of alcohol (e.g. a bottle of wine) or who are accompanied by seeing-eye dogs. Muslims refuse to do these things based on their religious beliefs. Where is the outcry against them?

The writing on the wall is clear as to which religion is most targeted for real discrimination here. But imagine a country where a sexual lifestyle carries more weight than a Bible-based belief. Does that look like an America we would want to live in? Think about it.

What do you think?  Click on the comments link in the bar below to share your thoughts. No registration necessary.