No Offense (to Gay Marriage)

UPDATE*******Via Patterico's, Perez Hilton has a copyright infrigment against NOM's add. But there are other copies out there. Little scum bag can't handle 3 secs of his mug on an ad.*******

The supporters of Gay Marriage are in an uproar with Carrie Prejean's NOM ad. ( They're also mad about the boob job she got was paid for by the Miss America pageant!) After reading some of the comments left on the youtube page there were a few ideas I want to point out.

1. The claim that if Marriage is for procreation, then why do some couples don't have children? (Maybe they choose not to or maybe they are infertile)
2. Religion is bigotry. (Really, then MLK was a Bigot too!)
3. Marriage is not taught in the schools. (Wrong, they do teach it. I'll go find the CA Ed Code and have a post on that.)
4. Children don't need a Mom and Dad to be raised. (Last time I checked you need a female and a male to create offspring).

I could go on but I have to go pick up my child (who really likes having a Mom and a Dad!) from school. I will come back to this with more support for Marriage (The Opposite kind that is!). Like Carrie says, "No Offense!"

FOCA on back burner with Obama

From the 100 day speech of President Obama on FOCA from CNSNews here:

“The Freedom of Choice Act is not the highest legislative priority,” Obama told reporters at a prime time news conference marking his 100th day in office. “I believe that women should have the right to choose. But I think that the most important thing we can do to tamp down some of the anger surrounding this issue is to focus on those areas that we can agree on."

President Obama, there is no anger surrounding this issue. It is the right of the unborn we are defending and the rights of the States to decide on the issue.
This is what FOCA will do if it is passed:

This would eradicate state and federal laws that the majority of Americans support, such as:

* Bans on Partial Birth Abortion
* Requirements that women be given information about the risks of getting an abortion
* Only licensed physicians can perform abortions
* Parents must be informed and give consent to their minor daughter's abortion

FOCA would erase these laws and prevent states from enacting similar protective measures in the future.

From FightFoca here.

Shift away from God toward European socialism

From CNSNews here by Rep. John Fleming (R-La.:

As first reported by CNSNews.com, the pediment attached to the wall that was to be the backdrop for Obama’s speech at the Catholic university featured the IHS symbol for Jesus Christ. The Obama administration asked school officials to cover the symbol, which was done by placing a piece of plywood painted black over it.


Gaston Hall stage as it looked on the afternoon of April 15 with "IHS" still shrouded. (CNSNews.com/Penny Starr)
Fleming told CNSNews.com that he sees President Obama’s request as symbolic of his political agenda for the country.

“I have a concern about the very sharp turn to socialism that’s happening in our government,” Fleming said.

He said the policies the president supports, from “cap and trade” government regulation of carbon emissions to universal health care and nuclear disarmament, is evidence of the country moving toward a European style of socialism, which in turn leads away from religion.

There is a difference between same-sex and opposite-sex marriage

I've seen the 'bigot' term used when one mentions "Traditional Marriage (between a man and a woman). Those who believe such have taken flack for it. But we were raised this way and for a reason. Civilization will not survive without it.
Excerpt from Crunchy Con here:

Same-sex marriage is founded on a lie about human nature: 'there is no difference between same-sex and opposite sex unions and you are a bigot if you disagree'.

Political movements can--sometimes at great human cost and with great output of energy--sustain a lie but eventually political regimes founded on lies collapse in on themselves.

I don't think of myself as optimistic: just realistic. What does losing marriage mean? First the rejection of the idea that children need a mom and dad as a cultural norm--or probably even as a respectable opinion. That's become very clear for people who have the eyes to see it. (See e.g. footnote 26 of the Iowa decision).

Second: the redefinition of traditional religious faiths as the moral and legal equivalent of racists. The proposition on the table right now is that our faith itself is a form of bigotry.

Despair is gay marriage advocates' prime message point. All warfare, including culture war, is ultimately psychological warfare. You win a war when you convince the other side to give up.

So now you want to decide we've lost on an issue where, in the March 12 CBS News poll two-thirds of Americans agree with us. I mean, does this make sense?

Public opinion hasn't changed much at all. What's changed is the punishment the gay marriage movement is inflicting on dissenters, which is narrowing the circle of people willing to speak. This is a very powerful movement, no question. Nobody understands that better than I do.

But in the end--and this is not necessarily "optimistic" -I think civilizations that can't hang onto an idea as basic as to make a marriage you need a husband and a wife aren't going to make it in the long haul.

So I'm not worried about the progressive myth that 200 years from now gay marriage will be the new world norm. I'm somewhat more worried about the kind of cultures around the world that might survive. It's not clear to me they'll have the virtues of American civilization for gay people or anyone else.

Really, this marriage idea has been around for a long time. I think it has legs.

Finally there's a third reason I'm not in despair. I've learned from five years in this fight--especially the last two years--that there are many things I can do that make a difference. I was told--by good people who agree with me, really smart people too--that California was impossible; you can't raise the money, nobody cares about marriage, if you get it on the ballot, we'll lose anyway because there's a generational shift. And none of that turned out to be true. Here's the good news: as civilization collapses the opportunities for intelligent and committed people to make a profound difference actually increase.

Maggie Gallagher is right. If we keep supporting Marriage (ie between a man and a woman) and fighting the cultural wars it will become the norm again. Stand up and fight. We are not bigots if we believe that a child needs to be raised by one Mother and one Father. Our faith is not bigoted if it teaches that marriage is between a Man and a Woman. I have mentioned same sex marriage to my 12 year old. Her point of view is this: It is the right of the child to have a Mom and a Dad. She was afraid of Prop. 8 loosing. She wanted it to win because having a Mom and Dad gave her comfort and stability. She worried about the kids who would not have a Mom and Dad.

Sense of rebellion brewing

Yes America, lets go "unhealthy" and have more TEA Parties! From Politico here:

But outside Washington, the reality is very different. Rank-and-file Republicans remain, by all indications, staunchly conservative, and they appear to have no desire to moderate their views. GOP activists and operatives say they hear intense anger at the White House and at the party’s own leaders on familiar issues – taxes, homosexuality, and immigration. Within the party, conservative groups have grown stronger absent the emergence of any organized moderate faction.

There is little appetite for compromise on what many see as core issues, and the road to the presidential nomination lies – as always – through a series of states where the conservative base holds sway, and where the anger appears to be, if anything, particularly intense.

"There is a sense of rebellion brewing," said Katon Dawson, the outgoing South Carolina Republican Party chairman, who cited unexpectedly high attendance at anti-tax “tea parties” last week.

Maude and her decision

I will always think of Maude and her decision to have the abortion. I wanted her to have the baby. I was so disappointed. But I did like Bea and she was a great talented actress. Rest in Peace.

Cap and Trade is a TAX!

"Nobody in this country realizes that cap-and-trade is a tax -- and it's a great big one," Rep. John Dingell (D-Michigan) said Friday.

Swine Flu outbreak at Ft. Dix

An explosive outbreak of febrile respiratory disease raced through the 19,000 personnel at Fort Dix in January 1976. Virological laboratory studies revealed the presence of a new swine influenza strain which was named A/New Jersey/76 (Hsw1N1). The virus infected 230 soldiers and caused severe respiratory disease in 13, including one death.

At the time it was believed that a swine virus had caused the 1918-19 influenza pandemic. Therefore scientists were concerned that the virus had returned to Fort Dix and would soon cause another catastrophic outbreak. Dr. Edwin Kilbourne, a noted influenza researcher, and others convinced the US Public Health Service to contract for the production of 150 million doses of vaccine. In March of 1976 President Gerald Ford announced a program to inoculate every man, woman and child in the United States against swine flu. Immunizations began in October, but only 45 million doses had been distributed when the program was halted in December. By then it was clear that A/New Jersey/76 was going nowhere. An unfortunate consequence was that many individuals developed Guillain-Barré syndrome, a neurological disease involving muscle weakness, paralysis, and sometimes death.

I remember lining up for that vaccine in 1976. I had no after effects but the pandemic that was to occur just stayed at Ft. Dix. And what a mess with the vaccine that killed about 30 people with Guillain-Barre syndrome. Let us hope this one is isolated in Mexico and San Diego.

This is a gem!

A stunning picture of Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano from NewsBusters. I think the Donkey must watch out! HEH!

Obama has no clue on T.E. A. Parites

Tea Bagging terms on the MSM

WE were warned about using the verb "to teabag." Rush said this week he would not mention what the use of the verb "to teabag" was. Here from NB on Scarborough's program on MSNBC:

On Thursday, Scarborough complained, "You look at these huge rallies, and I'm not going to mention names of people on networks that made sexual jokes, childish sexual jokes, about tens of thousands of Americans who went out and wanted to get involved in their government."

The MSNBC host continued, "I mean, it was really middle school jokes being made. I didn't hear those jokes being made when people on the left protested over the past eight years." Earlier in the 6am hour, he offered criticism that, one might assume, would have to be directed at his own network: "But, if a media outlet wants to expose its bias, they can mock tea parties, if they like."

Tea Party Pictures

I was not able to attend a party this April 15. I found this pictures on the 'net. Great teaching moment for my 12 year old to tell her about the Boston Tea Party in 1773. A movement that started the Revolutionary war and the birth of our country. I hope this is the birth of upsetting the current government and give it back to us, the people!

Marriage and Family, the social structure of Civilization

This week was a rough for us who support traditional marriage. With the Vermont legislation and Iowa ruling Homosexual Rights groups are unraveling the traditions that built our civilization.
From Focus on the Family here:

When one considers the social structure of civilization, family is clearly the foundational unit upon which church and government rest. Families are created and held together by the lifelong commitment of a man and a woman who live cooperatively and raise and nurture the children born to them. Families are the building blocks essential to the formation of a community, and strong social structure arises from the foundation many families provide.

Not only is marriage vital to society, the benefits of marriage for individual adults and children are well-documented. In general, married people live longer, spend less time in the hospital, have higher incomes and enjoy greater emotional support. Children raised by their mother and father are less likely to live in poverty or drop out of school and are more likely to finish college. They are also at lower risk for becoming sexually active in their teen years.

I advocate for traditional Marriage for the purpose of raising children and the family structure it provides. We cannot undermine the social structure of our civilization. Homosexual rights groups want to destroy the traditions that built our country. The family is the basic unit that holds us together. We have a strong community with families that are intact. Break families apart and you create havoc by increasing crime, drug abuse, unwed pregnancy, gang violence, etc. on community by making it a weaker.
From Domestic Divapalooza here:

Meanwhile, President Obama continued his direct assault on traditional marriage by appointing radical homosexual activist Harry Knox to his Council on Faith-Based and Neighborhood Partnerships. Knox, a leader with the far-left Human Rights Campaign, called the Pope a “discredited” leader for opposing homosexual marriage. Upon his appointment, Knox released a statement saying he would work with President Obama to ensure that “government has no place in funding bigotry” (i.e., Christian-based efforts).

The left is placing the term 'bigotry' on any one who opposes gay rights. It is a label that does not apply to traditional marriage and the family structure at all. Civilization was developed by the family and the community it fosters. We as humans will not survive without Traditional Marriage and the family unit. We are not bigots at all.

The Shores of Tripoli by Christopher Hitchens

Newt's tweet brings up the current Pirate situation compared to the Barbary Coast of 1800's. Back then we had to create our Naval forces. Today we have a large Navy and can deal with the situation. But will Obama make the choice to do something? The Shores of Tripoli was an important turning point in US history. From Time Magazine here:

Within days of his March 1801 inauguration as the third President of the United States, Thomas Jefferson ordered a naval and military expedition to North Africa, without the authorization of Congress, to put down regimes involved in slavery and piracy. The war was the first in which the U.S. flag was carried and planted overseas; it saw the baptism by fire of the U.S. Marine Corps--whose anthem boasts of action on "the shores of Tripoli"--and it prefigured later struggles with both terrorism and jihad.

The Barbary States of North Africa--Algiers, Tunis, Morocco and Tripoli (today's Libya)--had for centuries sustained themselves by preying on the maritime commerce of others. Income was raised by direct theft, the extortion of bribes or "protection" and the capture of crews and passengers to be used as slaves. The historian Robert Davis, in his book Christian Slaves, Muslim Masters: White Slavery in the Mediterranean, the Barbary Coast and Italy, 1500-1800, estimates that as many as 1.25 million Europeans and Americans were enslaved. The Barbary raiders--so called because they were partly of Berber origin--struck as far north as England and Ireland. It appears, for example, that almost every inhabitant of the Irish village of Baltimore was carried off in 1631. Samuel Pepys and Daniel Defoe both mention the frightening trade in their writings; at that time, pamphlets and speeches by survivors and escaped slaves had a huge influence on the popular imagination. James Thomson's famously rousing 1740 song Rule Britannia, with its chorus about how Britons "never shall be slaves," was a direct allusion to the Barbary terrorism.

Jefferson was appalled by this practice from an early stage of his career. In 1784 he wrote to James Madison about the Barbary depredations, saying, "We ought to begin a naval power, if we mean to carry on our commerce. Can we begin it on a more honorable occasion or with a weaker foe?" He added that John Paul Jones, the naval hero of the Revolutionary War, "with half a dozen frigates" could subdue the slave kingdoms of North Africa.

Read the rest of the article. The history lesson teaches us we can react to the threat and protect our shipping industry.

Why we must not give up

From Fox Forum by Andrea Tantaros here:

Every time the government assumes control of our rights and choices whether it is on health care or education, finances, family or faith, it sucks the life out of each one, eventually causing the decay of individual empowerment. As power is increasingly transferred to the government, it will seek to dilute and destroy our most precious values — from the sanctity of marriage to the right to bear arms, free speech and other fundamentals of our constitution.

The Obama Doctrine seeks to do just that: strip power from people, put government — and ultimately the tenants of radicalism — in control. This has a direct impact on our communities and our culture. And once the our culture has decayed, there is nothing left to fight for, which is why we must not cease or waiver in this, and all other, efforts to protect our freedoms.

Join a Tea Party on tax day or hang tea bags on your rear view mirror in your car. Revolt! Refuse to give up on our Liberty and Freedom!

From NRO: The Future of Marriage

Why I've been harping all week about Traditional Marriage. From NRO here:

Both as a social institution and as a public policy, marriage exists to foster connections between heterosexual sex and the rearing of children within stable households. It is a non-coercive way to channel (heterosexual) desire into civilized patterns of living. State recognition of the marital relationship does not imply devaluation of any other type of relationship, whether friendship or brotherhood. State recognition of those other types of relationships is unnecessary. So too is the governmental recognition of same-sex sexual relationships, committed or otherwise, in a deep sense pointless.

No, we do not expect marriage rates to plummet and illegitimacy rates to skyrocket in these jurisdictions over the next decade. But to the extent same-sex marriage is normalized here, it will be harder for American culture and law to connect marriage and parenthood. That it has already gotten harder over the last few decades is no answer to this concern. In foisting same-sex marriage on Iowa, the state’s supreme court opined in a footnote that the idea that it is best for children to have mothers and fathers married to each other is merely based on “stereotype.”

If worse comes to worst, and the federal courts sweep aside the marriage laws that most Americans still want, then decades from now traditionalists should be ready to brandish that footnote and explain to generations yet unborn: That is why we resisted.

Why is living the "stereotype" so bad? It's Social Engineering by the left again, to make it harder to connect parenthood to raising children. That is why we are not hearing a word about it in the MSM. We just hear about Gay couples rights are not equally protected under the law.

Iowa ruling again

From World Congress of Families Managing Director Larry Jacobs said,

Jacobs commented: “The rationale for this ruling is that limiting marriage to a man and a woman is a violation of equal protection for homosexual couples who want to marry, hence unconstitutional.”

“But if not allowing same-sex couples to marry is unconstitutional, what about a brother and sister, or a man and three women who want to marry? On the basis of today’s ruling, aren’t they also denied equal protection under the law by not being allowed to marry?” Jacobs asked.

“Clearly, the ‘equal protection’ argument is a ruse by a court determined to force its social views on the people of Iowa.” Jacobs charged. “Otherwise, it would have ruled that any two people, or group of people, have an equal-protection right to marry in the state.”

The ruling is the social engineering of the left to impose their beliefs on Iowan society.

The Iowa decision brought about the religion aspect of Marriage here From Christian Today :

“While unexpressed, religious sentiment most likely motivates many, if not most, opponents of same-sex civil marriage and perhaps even shapes the views of those people who may accept gay and lesbian unions but find the notion of same-sex marriage unsettling,” the seven justices said in a summary of their opinion. “Civil marriage must be judged under our constitutional standards of equal protection and not under religious doctrines or the religious views of individual.”

The court said that its desire to protect religious freedom is consistent with preventing government from endorsing any religious view, which opponents found troubling.

“The notion that the only reason one could have an opposition to same-sex marriage is because of religion is pretty preposterous,” said John Eastman, dean of the law school at Chapman University in California. “And to discount religion or to say it’s not a legitimate part of the discourse is not only erroneous but dangerous.”

Why Gay Marriage would be harmful (to children)

Here is an article that talks about why gay marriage is harmful to traditional marriage. I'm focusing on why it is harmful to children and why we haven't heard any of this information in the MSM.

Gay marriage would be bad for children. According to a recent article in Child Trends, "Research clearly demonstrates that family structure matters for children, and the family structure that helps the most is a family headed by two biological parents in a low-conflict marriage." While gay marriage would encourage adoption of children by homosexual couples, which may be preferable to foster care, some lesbian couples want to have children through anonymous sperm donations, which means some children will be created purposely without knowledge of one of their biological parents. Research has also shown that children raised by homosexuals were more dissatisfied with their own gender, suffer a greater rate of molestation within the family, and have homosexual experiences more often.

More support for Tradtional Marriage

From the News Buckit here:

First off, the institution of marriage needs to be preserved in its current form, as it is and has been the building block of society for really all of recorded history. Imposing a bit of social engineering on traditional couples is not exactly the most prudent, or the most effective, way of expanding the circle of who can receive certain benefits from the government. And sure, I'm being a little nebulous by saying "building block of society," but it's hard to dispute that despite its relatively high divorce rate in the U.S., married couples are (usually) stable and (usually) produce children (who themselves are usually stable.)

Thus, as society is made up of people (shocker, I know), being able to replace oneself -- and to do so in a controlled fashion -- is a social building block which, I think, is the essence and province of marriage... and a necessary component for a healthy society.

Why Same Sex Marriage is wrong

I found this article on Family Research Council titled "Ten Arguments From Social Science Against Same-Sex 'Marriage'" here. I have posted these before but wanted to revisit the issue. Since the Iowa decision this weekend I wanted to re-iterate the issue why same sex Marriage is wrong. I don't hear any of the counter arguments in the MSM at all. All I hear is Same Sex Marriage is inevitable. I hope it doesn't because the raising of children in a same sex relationship. The evidence is toward raising kids with a Mom and Dad. Also, The welfare of the child is in jeopardy outside a traditional marriage.

And I don't oppose it because of the "ewe" factor. And I do support Domestic Partnerships. I could care less if same sex couples want to have all the rights of a marriage. Just don't call it Marriage. I still believe in the traditional marriage. I have lived one for 15 years and have two kids. My spouse has been very supportive. We could not do it any other way but raise the kids in a traditional way. Does that mean I am a bigot? I don't think so.

If we were asked to design a system for making sure that children's basic needs were met, we would probably come up with something quite similar to the two-parent ideal. Such a design, in theory, would not only ensure that children had access to the time and money of two adults, it also would provide a system of checks and balances that promoted quality parenting. The fact that both parents have a biological connection to the child would increase the likelihood that the parents would identify with the child and be willing to sacrifice for that child, and it would reduce the likelihood that either parent would abuse the child.

Here are the ten points:
1. Children hunger for their biological parents.
2. Children need fathers.
3. Children need mothers.
4. Evidence on parenting by same-sex couples is inadequate.
5. Evidence suggests children raised by homosexuals are more likely to experience gender and sexual disorders.
6. Same-sex "marriage" would undercut the norm of sexual fidelity within marriage.
7. Same-sex "marriage" would further isolate marriage from its procreative purpose.
8. Same-sex "marriage" would further diminish the expectation of paternal commitment.
10. Women and marriage domesticate men.

Let's remember it is the right of the children to be raised by ONE DAD and ONE MOM. And the protection of that child from abuse.

Iowa Same Sex Ruling

Supporters and opponents of gay marriage said Saturday they were energized by the Iowa Supreme Court's forceful and unanimous ruling Friday that a state law limiting marriage to a man and a woman violates the constitutional rights of equal protection. The ruling opens the door for gays and lesbians to exchange vows in Iowa as soon as April 24.

Here we go again. Iowa says we are violating equal rights to limiting marriage to One Man and One Woman. What we need is to say that behavior (sex with either gender) is not a right. Marriage is a contract between One Man and One Woman to procreate and raise a family. Couples of either sex same or different can live together freeley. Their rights are not taken away. Read the 14th Amendment here.

Andy Pugno, general counsel for the Yes on Proposition 8 campaign, said the Iowa decision is not relevant to California.

"Iowa's decision looks almost exactly like last year's narrow decision of the California court when it was interpreting a mere statute in light of constitutional principles," he said. "It is ironic that they would rely on a decision that the voters esssentially reversed."

Passion (Palm Sunday)

Mark 11:1-10

1 When they drew near to Jerusalem, to Bethphage and Bethany at the Mount of Olives, he sent two of his disciples
2
and said to them, "Go into the village opposite you, and immediately on entering it, you will find a colt tethered on which no one has ever sat. Untie it and bring it here.
3
If anyone should say to you, 'Why are you doing this?' reply, 'The Master has need of it and will send it back here at once.'"
4
So they went off and found a colt tethered at a gate outside on the street, and they untied it.
5
Some of the bystanders said to them, "What are you doing, untying the colt?"
6
They answered them just as Jesus had told them to, and they permitted them to do it.
7
So they brought the colt to Jesus and put their cloaks over it. And he sat on it.
8
Many people spread their cloaks on the road, and others spread leafy branches that they had cut from the fields.
9
Those preceding him as well as those following kept crying out: "Hosanna! Blessed is he who comes in the name of the Lord!
10
Blessed is the kingdom of our father David that is to come! Hosanna in the highest!"