"Islam on Capitol Hill" a bit of a no-show...

The expected 50,000 didn't show up.

Good. We don't need any religion making any political claims on our country. I guess the ACLU better start pushing for "separation of Mosque and State" as soon as possible.

An interesting quote:

"Hearing Dr. Ahmad Dwidar, Imam of the Islamic Center in New York, say “We are going to the White House, so that Islam will be victorious, Allah willing, and the White House will turn into the Muslim house” is not very all-American, unifying or comforting. It's good thing for him the news was not interested, or this event could have become a circus for Islam on Capitol Hill."

Cantcha just feeeEEEeeel the warm-fuzzies radiating from the Islamic Center in New York? And all this talk about how Islam on Captiol Hill was supposed to be a peaceful, happy-clappy, unifying event to show that Islam was no threat to non-Muslims or the West? I don't think so. Christians weren't allowed to join in the prayers. And the poster blatantly stated that this event was about Islamic unity. Observe:



How much longer are we going to buy the lie that "radical Islam" is no threat to us? Wake up, America. And Britain. And Europe...

California public schools teaching Islam while bashing Christianity...

Separation of Church (Mosque?) and State, anyone??


...California’s course on world religions also omits Islam’s long history of jihadist violence, while portraying Christianity as an intolerant and bloodthirsty faith.

Christianity isn’t given equal time, either. It’s covered in just two days — as opposed to up to two weeks for Islam — and doesn’t involve kids in any role-playing activities like the Islam unit.

Students do get a healthy dose of skepticism about the Christian faith, including a biting history of its persecution of other people.

Islam, in contrast, gets a pass from critical review. Even jihad is presented as an “internal personal struggle to do one’s best to resist temptation,” not waging holy war.

“California schools are pushing an unbalanced religious agenda that favors Islam and minimizes Christianity and Judaism,” Accuracy in Academia warns in its latest Campus Report.


Uh...? Welcome to the Caliphate of Amerika?

Read the whole article here.

You get asked a lot if you want that stupid Down's Syndrome test...

I wrote the previous post late at night and all those big, red letters are a direct reflection of my absolute feelings regarding baby murder. None of that was the result of pregnancy hormones ~ something folk are quick to claim whenever a pregnant woman gets even remotely emotional! "Oh, calm down! It's just your hormones..."

Well, ok, they're actually correct when they say that but it's not just *pregnancy* hormones. It's the normal hormones that all men and women have that cause them to PROTECT BABIES AND CHILDREN from harm.

And thanks to the Feminist "sexual education" that is forcibly rammed down the throats of younger and younger children... boys and girls turn into men and women that have been trained to ignore those natural feelings of protection and replace them with a cold indifference when it comes to baby killing. (About the only response you get out of such folk is rage towards anti-baby killing people like me.)

Anyhoo, being pregnant is an interesting and trying experience because you find yourself entering a system that looks as if it is doing everything it can to preserve and protect the unborn babies in our bellies ~ but this image is soon shattered once you realize that a baby will only be protected if it is wanted. Otherwise these doctors and even nurses are helping your baby while killing other babies.

Everywhere you go you find the the killing of babies being promoted while the now novel idea of keeping your baby is never even mentioned. (Even if you keep it long enough to adopt said baby to another couple.) From posters on the backs of bathroom doors that urge you to rush to your GP in order to get a "morning after" pill in order to swiftly terminate your early pregnancy, to pamphlets that urge underage youth to remember that they have the right to an abortion regardles of what mom and dad say, to "Would you like this or that test so you can decide if you want to terminate your pregnancy in case the baby isn't perfect?" to, "No? Why not? Would you mind telling me again why not?"

Then, when you finally are in labor you find yourself in a maternity hospital where you know full well that on one end there is the bringing forth of life ... but not far away there are babies being slaughtered ~ at the hands of those that will soon deliver your baby and place him/her on your chest.

I was very happy when I thought that I'd be having this next baby here locally because our hospital does not do abortions. So it's one of those good, clean places where you can waddle through the maternity ward and feel genuine joy. "This is a place of life. Babies are born here." From what I know, the surgeons that do the c-sections are not OBs and therefore (as far as I know?) they do not engage in abortions. So their hands are clean ~ they are hands that give life and you can rest knowing that you're not lying there under the knife of someone that you know you must pray for every day because they will one day have to stand before God and explain why they killed babies.

Being pregnant is like walking a mine field. If you are a man or woman that truly believes that all human life is sacred then you cannot ignore the baby killing and the baby killers around you. You cannot ignore the fact that you are walking the halls of a place that murders defenseless little babies, naked and terrified as they are hacked to bits or torn to shreds within what used to be the absolute safety of mommy's womb.

You can't ignore it because it hangs there in the air like a dark mist of evil. You find your hands automatically covering your protruding belly as you instinctively protect your own unborn child from the culture of death that now fills places that used to be institutions of healing and life.

I remember when I wrote to "my" monks about the birth of our daughter. I was elated as I told about her finally being "on the outside" with us after 9 long months of wanting to hold her and kiss her.

I remember the letter from one of my priest friends that came in reply. He rejoiced with me for half of the letter ~ and then in the other half he urged me to pray and to pray for that maternity hospital because... "it is also a death factory for babies."

Yes indeed. For anyone that believes that all human life is sacred you can't seem to shake the feeling that as you walk the halls of maternity hospitals everywhere you are, in a sense, walking the crematorium halls of a modern-day Auschwitz.

After all, "abortion" is nothing more then a another holocaust of those that are deemed to be sub-human undesireables.

Will babies with down syndrom just disapear?

Ya know... when I went to see one of the OBs (I'm being vague on purpose) for one of my pregnancies they asked if I wanted the down syndrom test done (is "syndrom" spelled right?? Hmmm.) You know the test: so you can KILL YOUR UNBORN BABY if there's even a slight chance that they are a sub-human, unworthy, imperfect **Gag!!** Down Syndrom child.

Well, I politely declined, right? I didn't make a big issue out of the situation. I just said, "No thank you."

And the OB asked me THREE different times, during the course of our conversation, why I didn't want the Down Syndrom(e?) test? They were very polite but decidedly baffled and deffinately aiming for an explanation... and I was becoming more and more angry with each asking. I was sorely tempted to say, "Because I refuse to kill my baby just because he/she might not meet our godless society's warped definition of 'perfect'? Is that a good enough answer? And how about I have to sit here knowing that me and my baby's life is in the hands of a BABY KILLER that will deliver my children because we want them and then turn around and murder another unwanted baby through abortion just down the hall!!!!!!"

**Heavy Breathing and Growling and Twitching**

Instead I blurted out, after the third asking, through gritted teeth, "Because no matter what, we'll keep our child." (Then I almost bit my tongue in half because I almost said, "You know: we'll condescend to keep our little sub-human offspring much like someone would take in a stray cat...")

FFFFFWWWWAAAAAAHHHHGGGGG!!!! I just... ya know? I can't... it's just so... OMG!! I live in an era where KILLING YOUR BABY is considered PERFECTLY OK!!!!!!!! I just can't get over it!! it's so wrong!! It's murder!! People are going to rot in hell for killing their unborn babies and everyone just sits around saying it's all good and hey, aren't we such an advanced society that's evolving towards even more greatness??? Isn't it grand that we'VE left behind those hideous dark ages where people WERE NOT ALLOWED TO KILL THEIR BABIES???

So yeah, anyway, you'll see why I've posted the following article:

Will babies with down syndrom just disapear?
Commentary by Albert Mohler, President, Southern Baptist Seminary

September 21, 2009 (AlbertMohler.com) - The development of prenatal diagnostic technologies presents a constellation of moral issues -- with the diagnosis of Down syndrome front and center. Over the past several years, a marked decrease in the number of babies born with Down syndrome has been both observed and widely reported. This decrease can be traced directly to the decision to abort after prenatal diagnosis.

As Science Daily reports, a new leading article to be published in Archives of Disease in Childhood points to developments in the near future that will likely increase the diagnosis of Down syndrome [DS] during pregnancy. "New tests expected to be introduced next year will offer a simple blood test that poses no risk to the fetus and delivers a definitive diagnosis of one of more of the genetic variants of Down syndrome -- trisomy 21, translocation, or mosaicism," the journal reported.

The development of these new tests will almost surely make the practice of prenatal screening for Down syndrome more widespread. At present, the available tests pose some risk to the fetus and are invasive. The new tests expected next year are based on simple blood tests.

The new research is based on work by Dr. Brian Skotko, a clinical genetics fellow at Children's Hospital Boston. Skotko, who has a sister with Down syndrome, asks this haunting question: "As new tests become available, will babies with Down syndrome slowly disappear?"

His research reveals deeply troubling trends. Between 1989 and 2005, births of babies with Down syndrome decreased by 15 percent. As Science Daily explains, "In the absence of prenatal testing, researchers would have expected the opposite -- a 34 percent increase in births -- due to the trend of women waiting longer to have children; known to increase the chances of having a baby with Down syndrome."

In an article published in 2005, Skotko argued that doctors are often ill-prepared to discuss the diagnosis of Down syndrome with their pregnant patients. Chillingly, he also revealed that a significant percentage of the doctors "reported that they 'emphasize' the negative aspects of DS so that patients would favor a termination."

With the new technologies of prenatal diagnosis so close on the horizon, Skotko now sees a "true collision" on its way. "More women will be going through the testing process, which could lead to a lot of difficult, uncomfortable conversations between physicians and expectant patients."

The reason for the decrease in the number of babies born with Down syndrome comes into clearer focus when The Washington Post cites Skotko's research indicating that 92 percent of women who learn they are carrying a baby with Down syndrome choose to abort the pregnancy. That is more than nine out of ten.

The dimensions of the "collision" Dr. Skotko sees coming now come into view. If these percentages hold, the development of these new tests will almost certainly lead to a vast increase in the number of babies aborted after the diagnosis of Down syndrome.

This presents a grave moral challenge to the medical community -- and to the society at large. Medical care is a social good for which the entire society is responsible. The development of prenatal diagnostic technologies and procedures brings a moral crisis right to our doorsteps -- and our hearts. Will we see people with Down syndrome simply disappear?

In his 2005 article, published in the American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Dr. Skotko explained that prenatal testing for Down syndrome presents expectant parents with a simple choice -- continue the pregnancy or abort. He continued:

"Knowing this, health care providers have historically operated under the assumption that if a woman consents to prenatal screening or diagnosing, she must believe that having a child with DS would be an undesired outcome and wish to terminate her pregnancy if such a diagnosis were made prenatally."

Expectant parents should read that sentence over and over again, and so should those who counsel them.

As Dr. Skotko understands all too well, this moral crisis is not limited to babies with Down syndrome. He asks: "Should expectant parents be able to select out fetuses with an undesired sex? Should fetuses with genes that predispose them to adult breast cancer be prenatally identified? Should couples in the future be supported if they wish to terminate fetuses with genes correlated with sexual preferences?"

The fact that 92 percent of women who are told that their unborn child carries the high risk of Down syndrome choose to abort the baby should shock us all. What does that say about our devaluation of human life and human dignity? This can only mean that these women see a child with Down syndrome as not worth having -- and the baby as a life not worth living.

Dr. Skotko points to the new tests just around the corner and sees a collision coming. Given his important research, we had better see a moral crisis looming. The Culture of Death is gaining momentum before our eyes. Who will be next in line to be considered unworthy of life?

The hospital makes her ill with C.difficile and then decides to kill her

(Welp, I read about the NHS's routine dehydrating to death of purposely heavily sedated patients (so they can't escape?), many of whom are NOT terminally ill... and now this. I guess we shouldn't go to hospitals for help any more ~ being sick means you're "due to die." (As per the following article.)

God help me if I should get ill after this upcoming c-section. I deffinately won't be sticking around the hospital because I might end up heavily sedated and killed!)

Elderly Woman Rescued by Family from NHS Dehydration Order
Deemed "due to die" by doctors in February, Ellen Westwood is now home and recovering

By Hilary White

BIRMINGHAM, UK, July 2, 2008 (LifeSiteNews.com) - "Ellen Westwood was due to die in February but her family's Catholic and for them, life is sacred." So begins the television coverage by the BBC of a battle by a Birmingham family to prevent the NHS from dehydrating their mother to death.

("Due to die"??? As in, "You're not worthy of treatment (because you're old/disabled, etc) so we're going to schedule your death" !!)

According to the BBC's report, doctors decided on a Friday in February that Mrs. Westwood was "due to die" by the following Monday, but the family, with the intervention of their priest, fought the order to remove the woman's hydration.

Mrs. Ellen Westwood, 88, was in Birmingham's Selly Oak Hospital for two months after she had been admitted into Birmingham's Royal Orthopaedic Hospital for routine shoulder surgery. The woman ended up being treated for dementia and C.difficile, which Westwood's daughter alleges she contracted at the Orthopaedic Hospital after the surgery. The bacterial infection soon spread to her cheeks, face and throat, making it difficult for her to swallow.

(It's the hospital's fault that you got infected with C.difficile but hey, you're old. And demented. So it's time for us to kill you.)

Doctors at Selly Oak Hospital then told the family that all food, fluids and hydration were to be stopped and that Mrs. Westwood would be given morphine "because she is dying".

(More like, "Because we are killing her.")

Ellen's daughter, Kathleen Westwood, told the BBC that the decision had been taken because it was "a capacity ruling" and that under current UK law, the family's wishes do not enter into the equation.

"If you deem somebody to have lost capacity, then the doctors can act in the best interests," she said.

(This is because everyone knows that most families will not stand by and watch doctors kill their loved ones. So you have to get the families out of the way in order to clear a path to allow the all out murder of patients. Clever.)

The family had an interview with doctors on a Friday afternoon, in which they were told that Mrs. Westwood was going to die.

(Correction: "...in which they were told that Mrs. Westwood was going to be killed.")

"In [the doctors'] view the best interests was for my mother to die - and clearly by Monday she would have been dead," Kathleen told BBC.

(Murdered is more like it.)

The family, however, brought the woman food and water. Hospital officials responded by threatening to report the family to social services for feeding Mrs. Westwood.

(Are you SERIOUS?! You get in trouble with the so-called social services for FEEDING your own mother?? Holy crap. When I get old I'm going to drag myself out onto the peat bogs and die out there under the open sky. I'm not going to allow the NHS to kill me!)

"We said we don't want this to happen and they said 'it's happening, sorry'. I had to fight very, very hard to get it stopped."

("It's happening, sorry. We're knowingly and willingly killing your mother for no other reason then the fact that she is old and thus she is a drain on our already over-taxed, under-funded NATIONAL HEALTH CARE SYSTEM ~ the same exact health care system that President Obama wants to set up in America...the same kind of system that he is already speaking of as 'rationing health care' to those that are deemed worthy of money being spent on saving and/or extending their lives...")

Eventually the family obtained a second opinion and Mrs. Westwood was able to go home, where she is recovering well and is celebrating her 89th birthday today.

(Recovering well. At home, far away from the murdering doctors in the hospital. Folks, it's time for each and every one of us to at least become EMTs so that we can treat our own damn selves (and loved ones) at home!! Where everyone will have a far better chance of survival because they won't be getting deeply sedated and killed (NHS policy by the way!) due to their unworthiness!)

A statement from the NHS said, "We have met with the family and are investigating these issues via our normal internal channels." The NHS has said that it followed national guidelines in making its decision.

("Our national guidelines on how to kill unworthy patients. that are perfectly capable of enjoying a full recovery from their present (and often hospital-caused) illnesse..")

Under the UK's Mental Capacity Act, passed in 2005, patients deemed to be incapable of making decisions in their own "best interests" can have all fluids withheld until they die. The family can do little to stop this process once doctors have made their decision.

(Do they deem you incapable of making decisions in your own best interest *before* or *after* they deeply sedate you? Do they ask you if you want to live or die when you're in the throes of a febrile haze or do they wait until your fever drops and you can manage to string two words together? Seriously! This "Mental Capacity Act" is downright dangerous! If you're mental capacity is compromised due to treatable illness or medication does this mean you're ripe for the pickin' under the NHS death-by-dehydration national guidelines?????)

While active euthanasia officially remains illegal in Britain, some are saying that the NHS standard procedure of issuing elderly and vulnerable patients with an "end of life plan" that includes dehydration, is simply euthanasia under a different name. And it is becoming common. A packed meeting this week in Stafford organised by a group called Cure the NHS, heard the stories of families who had been forced to bring in priests and lawyers to stop similar orders from killing their loved ones, even though the patients sometimes are not terminally ill.

Pro-life advocates in Britain deplored the Labour government's "Mental Capacity" legislation, calling it "the end of the Hippocratic tradition of medical ethics in Britain". In January 2005, Baroness Chapman, a disabled peer, said that the Mental Capacity bill failed to make patients safe and left them open to abuse. Speaking during the House of Lords second reading debate on the bill, she said, "The bill ignores the fact that people have a basic right to life."

The only thing that anyone has a "basic right" to is shutting up and paying our taxes. THIS IS EXACTLY WHAT YOU GET WHEN YOU HAVE A NATIONAL HEALTH CARE SYSTEM IN YOUR COUNTRY.

Death. Murder. At the hands of our "healers" no less.

This is exactly what we "Right Wing Extremists" (a.k.a. ObamaCare protestors) are trying to avoid. You might think it's great to get "free" health care from the hands of Sugar Daddy Government (it's not free btw. You pay out the nose via sky-high taxes!!) but guess what? Once Sugar Daddy Government has YOUR life it ITS hands, you suddenly find yourself on the business end of health care rationing.

As in... eventually only the healthy live. The unhealthy ~ those that need health care ~ are killed.

Woman that founded first domestic violence shelter for women speaks out AGAINST Feminism and the violence, cruelty of WOMEN...

Woman as automatic, perpetual victim... challenged by none other then Erin Pizzey, the woman that founded the first Domestic Violence shelters for women.

Apparently the Feminist-tinted glasses never clouded this woman's vision. Here are a few quotes from the article:

ERIN PIZZEY set up the world's first refuge for battered women in 1971 - and went on to establish an international movement for victims of domestic violenceRead more:

...Thirty years later, when feminism exploded onto the scene, I was often mistaken for a supporter of the movement. But I have never been a feminist, because, having experienced my mother's violence, I always knew that women can be as vicious and irresponsible as men....

Indeed, when I later opened my refuge for battered women, 62 of the first 100 to come through the door were as abusive as the men they had left.

Feminism, I realised, was a lie. Women and men are both capable of extraordinary cruelty. Indeed, the only thing a child really needs - two biological parents under one roof - was being undermined by the very ideology which claimed to speak up for women's rights.

This country is now on the brink of serious moral collapse. We must stop demonising men and start healing the rift that feminism has created between men and women.

Harriet Harman's insidious and manipulative philosophy that women are always victims and men always oppressors can only continue this unspeakable cycle of violence. And it's our children who will suffer

Read the entire article here.

Having suffered 99% of my own emotional and physical abuse at the hands of girls and women, I know exactly what Erin Pizzey is on about. (As a matter of fact... which gender is it that is most vicious and personally abusive when commenting on my blog? heh! Food for thought!) And I can see exactly why Erin Pizzey, like myself, does not buy into Feminism and sees it instead as a very destructive ideology that must be abandoned before our society is driven past the point of no return.

In Tuscon schools you'll be punished less if you're not white?

Huh?

…The board is calling for a two-tiered form of student discipline. One for Black and Hispanic students; one for everyone else.
With the goal of creating a “restorative school culture and climate” that conveys a “sense of belonging to all students,” the board is insisting that its schools reduce its suspensions and/or expulsions of minority students to the point that the data reflect “no ethnic/racial disparities.”

Read here for more.

Ah, yes! The classic "special treatment for non-whites" nonsense that continues to plague America.

Now, before you jump me for being "racists" and trying to blame all crime on miniorities, consider this little dose of reality:

Regardless of race, gender, sexual orientation and/or faith, any group of people that daily wallow in a society-given sense of victimhood and entitlement will always be the ones causing the most trouble. After all, they have a "right" to rise up and fight back against their evil oppressors! Their misbheavior, lack of respect for society, their crime and immature nonsense is "justified" by their "oppresesive" position in said society. "I'm just getting the bad guys back for hurting me!"

Instead of adding even MORE entitlement and victimization to the heap these schools in Tuscon need to level the playing field and make ALL races truly equal. No entitlement. No special treatment. No victimhood. "You're ALL human so deal with it."

Hmmm. The same should go with how our society treats women. Get rid of the Feminist sense of entitlement and victimhood and our society would start to return to normalcy and sanity...

Then we'd see the chips coming off of the shoulders and a rise in decent behavior!

The day of Islamic prayer in the heart of Capitol Hill???

I was reading about this day of Islamic prayer that will take place in Washington D.C.. It's supposed to be all about peace and love and...

but over on Michelle Malkin's blog she points out that:

"Attorney and “main organizer” of “Islam on Capitol Hill”, Hassen Ibn Abdellah is President of the Elizabeth, New Jersey Dar ul-Islam, Inc. Abdellah was, described October 25, 1993 by the New York Times, as the “most aggressively combative of the lawyers” representing the terrorists who staged the 1993 World Trade Center attacks."

Um... why the hell is the defense lawyer of Islamic terrorists that attacked America being allowed to organize "Islam on Capitol Hill"???? Does anyone else find this more then a bit startling?

And why is this event taking place in our political capitol? Religion and State are separate in America. What is this event trying to imply?

The event is even given the unnerving name, "Islam on Capitol Hill."

Not, "A day of Islamic prayer" or "Muslim day of prayer" ...

but out and out "Islam on Capitol Hill."

Read that again: ISLAM on Capitol Hill.

Sounds to me like someone is trying to make a political/religious claim on our Capitol!

Sorry folks but that's much too powerful of a statement for me to ignore. Imagine the (rightful!!) outcry if we Catholics organized and equally politically charged event called, "Catholicism on Captiol Hill" ???

And one of Michelle Malkin's commentors made a really good point when they asked:

"I’m also curious if the secular activist crowd will show up to scream about the separation of religion and state at this function."

Yes, indeed! Because we all know exactly what would happen if we tried to have a Catholic day of prayer in the middle of the Capitol!

Wait, we wouldn't even get a chance. Apparently Mr. Hassen Ibin Abdellah is a nice, safe, peaceful guy and we are hateful right-wing extremist terrorists...

Nah. More then likely The Secular Activist Crowd will not be protesting. Instead, they'll be falling all over themselves to prove how "tolerant" and "open minded" they are about such a politically charged (and in-yo-face-America!) event. They'll be wriggling like overjoyed puppies whilst exclaiming their delight that we have ISLAM ON CAPITOL HILL.

Hey, I'm all about peace. I'm all about religious freedom in our country for ALL religions.

But don't expect me to exude a flood of warm fuzzies when any religion makes such a bold political move at MY country. I wouldn't support "Catholicism on Capitol Hill" and I cannot support "Islam on Capitol Hill."

This event could have taken place in a less POLITICAL area and it could have been given a much less POLITICAL title.

Answers to some comments regarding single mothers, the poor, etc:

"I don't think taxpayers should bail me out because I was stupid enough to go to school in the hopes of making a better life for myself and my future family."

Exactly! FINALY! Someone that GETS IT! Even someone being sarcastic and woe-is-me! YOU make choices... YOU are responsible for those choices. YOU aren't entitled to everyone else's money when YOUR choices make your life difficult.

It's really simple, Mel.

If you can't afford to go to college, don't go. College is not a God-given human right. No one is entitled to college. You won't get any pity from me if you're killing yourself trying to work-and-pay for something that you can't afford. Doing so is YOUR choice. And if you freely choose to live beyond your means and bury yourself in debt and you find it hard well... tough. Should of thought of that BEFORE you ran off to college.

College does not guarantee you any better of a job then the lowly working non-college-edumacated shmucks that are beneath you. As a matter of fact ALL that college gurantees you is... debt. Oodles and ooooodles of debt that you'll be paying off until middle age. So, you go to college to go into debt so that you can get a job to pay off college debts into your 40's.

Smart. Reallllll smart.

Exactly how is college debt going to make a better life for yourself and your future family?

It's not! So quit kidding yourself and get in touch with reality! Stop being a sheep!

(Of course all of the above is made null and void if you're one of those college students that is managing to pay-as-you-go and NOT get into debt. In that case, bravo for using your head but uh... quit whining just the same. YOU still CHOSE to do this to yourself! Suffer your personal sacrafices with dignity.)

Meanwhile how many folk don't go to college, start of at an entry-level position, (oh no! Not that!) climb their way up the ladder and end up making far more then you will... without debt... and, better yet!, often end up getting FREE COLLEGE through their company after proving that they are a loyal employee that plans on sticking around?

Now that, folks, is smart!

Another comment that sums up a lot of what people say/write to me with regards to single moms:

"I'm not quite sure how your continual tirades at support for single mums - most of whom were made single due to no fault of their own - gels with your argument about staying home and raising their children?

Which are they supposed to do? This is a genuine serious question. And I'd also like to see some statistics about how many single parents deliberately set out to be that?"

My Response Regarding My Stance On "Single Mothers": (I'll try and address the "gels with your argument about staying home and raising their children... at the end...)

Ah! The "through no fault of their poor little selves" card! A classic, modern take on the single mother issue.

Yes, there are single parents that end up single because they are widowed or their husbands walk out on them. Or they have to get a divorce because hubby is abusive etc, etc, etc. Yes, a *small minority* (not "most", as you claim) of single mothers are single mothers through no fault of their own.

In the case of a single mom that is widowed or abandoned, through no fault of her own, the Church, not the government, has a duty to help her to take care of her children.

But let's face it, folks: how many women willingly and knowingly marry total losers, huh? How many women, instead of making a wise choice as to their future spouse, go and marry the "bad boys" that gets them all hot and sexy? And then these dumb women end up in a crappy marriage because... because THEY FREELY CHOSE TO MARRY A LOSER. No one else made them marry that loser. THEY chose to marry the loser, the drunk, the "bad boy."

And then the rest of us are supposed to feel sorry for them when their marriages fall apart and they end up in dire straights due to their own willing stupidity?

You'll have to excuse me if I don't shed a lot of tears for those women that end up single mothers because THEY married trash. You make your bed, you sleep in it. That's life. The tax-paying public does not owe you a cent of their hard-earned money because YOU couldn't use your silly little head and chose a husband with care rather then with your raging hormones and quest for status.

Also, something so many of you are so quick to "forget" (ignore??) is the fact that the *majority* of today's single mothers are single mothers because they had sex outside of wedlock and found themselves raising their kids on their own.

THEY made the choice to have sex outside of wedlock. No one forced them to do so. THEY could have said, "No" and kept their legs crossed and waited until they were in a stable marriage before having sex.

Ok, fine, women have sex outside of wedlock and many of them end up single mothers because if THEIR irresponsible choice. Does this mean that these single moms are trash? No. Not at all. Like the rest of us, they are normal, sinful human beings.

But once again, the tax-paying public owes them nothing. Not one red cent. You make your bed, you sleep in it. And if you can't take care of your own child because of YOUR irresponsibility and the government has to forcibly take money from everyone else in order to clothe, house, and feed your kid ~ then YOU are the one that owes. Got it? YOU are the one that should be paying back a large chunk of that money once your kids come of age.

It's high time that we as a society take a big fat reality check and stop painting irresponsible women as "victims" that must be cared for by the forced redistribution of everyone else's wealth.

We women demand that we be given equality and respect by society ~ but at the same time we also demand that we be treated like helpless twits that need special treatment and handouts whenever WE get ourselves into trouble.

Alright... now we have the question about how does my "continual tirades at support for single moms" (in other words, my arguments for a return to personal responsibility and accountability amongst women) gels with my arguments about them staying home and raising their children:

Wellllllllll... sadly, if you make irresponsible choices you end up in a mess and oftentimes you have to work your way out of that mess. (And today, modern women think they don't have to work or something? That they should get a free ride out of their self-induced problems??) So sadly a lot of single moms - who are single moms due to their own irresponsible choice to have sex outside of wedlock - will have to work in order to support their children. I by no means think that this is fun and such women have my sympathy ~ but I by no means excuse them as poor, innocent, oppressed victims and think that they are entitled be supported by tax payers. Sorry but that's just the way it is.

The solution is not more tax-funded government programs. The solution is even simpler then that:

If more women would become responsible with regards to sex and/or their choice of spouse (I know that's a hard one for today's crowd...) then we'd have less single mothers suffering through miserable, difficult lives.

In other words: the solution to YOUR problem lies with YOU. Not me. Not my hard working, tax-paying husband. Not my tax-paying neighbors. Not the government. YOU. Make responsible choices right from the start and YOU wont end up getting YOURSELF into trouble.

Something that wasn't said in comments but is often handed to me as an argument:

"But you're pro-life! If a woman finds herself in a "crisis pregnancy" you say she can't have an abortion. So how do you suggest she support herself as a single mother?"

I call this argument the, "If You Don't Pay For My Upkeep, I'll Kill My Unborn Baby" card.

Sick. Just... sick.

You know what, folks? If you have sex outside of wedlock and get yourself pregnant and then kill your baby ... you'll get your just desserts when you stand before God on judgement day. It's that simple. (Unless you repent of the sin of murder, of course.)

If you don't want to find yourself facing the difficulties of single motherhood then don't have sex outside of marriage.

Finally, if any of you want statistics, go find them. It's not my job to do all of your thinking for you.

Next:

"I really hope and pray you never find yourself without a job::oops sorry ,you don't know what its like to work::maybe if you should find yourself on the streets--it can hapen very quickly,I hope someone will be more compassionate towards you as you are towards others; you are ONE BIG,FAT,MOANING SLOB who has nothing nice to say whatsoever about anything or anyone!!!"

I just couldn't resist commenting on "Anna's" comment. After all, I'm ONE BIG,FAT,MOANING SLOB that has nothing "nice" to say whatsoever about anything or anyone.

Anna: Wow. Your comment is deep. Really got me thinking hard. You're right! My entire reason for existing is:

1) To be thin. Because if you are even remotely fat, you are a second-class peice of crap and you should know your place.

2) To be "nice" ~ i.e. "tolerate" injustice, lies, and harmful behaviors that destroy lives and society.

3) annnnd....To... work? Yes, of course. *I* know nothing about working. Silly me!

Right. Welp, thank you so much for your profound, logical wisdom.

Do we owe the poor our support?

"He who doesn't work, let him not eat!" 2 Thessalonians 3:10

Take a good hard look at that sign. Not the woman. Read the sign.

Do you see what I see? Yet another Liberal promoting the idea that it is the duty of the American taxpayers to provide health and housing for everyone else.

Entitlement plain and simple and on display right here "from the trenches" by our fair protester.

The bible plainly spells out how it is that we are supposed to help the truly needy in our midst ~ and that provision has nothing to do with handing our money over to serial single mothers having multiple kids by different daddies, drunks and druggies having their sin re-classified as a "disease", and certainly not to lazy slackers that refuse to get off their duffs and WORK.

"But" you say "Christians have a duty to help the poor!"

So we do. But not in the Liberal sense where anyone that happens to be poor automatically qualifies for handouts and charity.

And not in the Liberal sense that anyone living an immoral life that gets themself into trouble because of their sin is entitled to handouts and pity.

In the not so distant past anyone that came to the majority of the charitable organizations looking for a handout were put to work. If they couldn't bring themselves to chop wood for poor widows or engage in other charitable acts then unless they had a legitimate illness or injury they were given nothing and sent on their way.

The bible is very clear on how we are to go about caring for the poor amongst us. First of all, just because someone is poor, that doesn't mean they are automatically entitled to be given a handout. This is because God does not look kindly upon slackers. If you're capable of working but you either refuse or you work beneath your capabilities because you're lazy or you have a sinful addiction, guess what?

"He who doesn't work, let him not eat!" 2 Thess. 3:10

If you are the head of your household (and this includes single moms!) and your family is suffering due to your irresponsibility, guess what?

"But if any provide not for his own, and specially for those of his own house, he hath denied the faith, and is worse than an infidel." 1Timothy 5:8

A good read of 1st Timothy, chapter 5 shows us that that even widows have to toe the line ~ just because you're widowed does not mean you have an automatic entitlement to handouts.

It is not the duty of Christians or taxpayers to hand over any of their money, time, or pity to anyone that is a slacker, an addict of some destructive sinful behavior, or a person wallowing in an immoral lifestyle.

This is the reason that Christians disagree with Liberals on so many "social justice" issues. We don't hate Obama. We're not racists. We're not facists.

We're logical.

Why anyone in any society would think that it's RIGHT to burden the hard-working taxpayers with the care and upkeep of lazy slackers, additcs, and immoral people is beyond me. If YOU get yourself into trouble because of YOUR sinful, irresponsible behavior then it is up to YOU to get back on track and get right with God. End of story. No one, least of all the tax payer, owes you anything.

And if the Liberals would just get a clue instead of trying so hard to justify immorality, at the expense of hard-working, law-abiding citizens, then we would find ourselves in agreement when it comes to true charity for the truly poor.

So, to the lady holding the sign: Sorry madam, but no one owes anyone any health care or housing at tax payer expense. It was never meant to be the Government's job to take care of the truly poor by the forced redistribution of wealth. To do so is to place a destructive burden on society and it gets us nowhere.

That job of caring for the poor belongs to the Church ~ but only when a person truly deserves to be cared for, and with the goal of helping that person to become as self-sufficient as possible.

**If you really want to help the poor** then pray. Yes, we do need to help the truly poor with our money and time, but we also need to pray that our society returns to God ~ because once the majority of people start to live the Gospel, we'll have a serious decrease in poverty and crime.

Money is good but our greatest help is prayer.

Gutted, "plain" Catholic Churches ~ is this better?

On the heels of my previous post...

First, I want to say that: I have absolutely nothing against any Christian being "plain."

Yes, plain isn't bad. But neither is it a way to make yourself holy. We always have to be very careful when we start to make our lives "plain" because we might be deluding ourselves into believing that our level of plain-ness equates to our level of holiness.

If you cannot worship God in a highly decorated church then guess what? The problem lies with you. Not the decorations. Obviously you are entering a church not for God but for some other, external reason ~ and you've made an Idol out of plain-ness.

Which brings me to this post about, Should we gut all of our Catholic churches and make them plain? Does the artwork within cause us to be less holy?

No on both counts. Here's why:

When I was doing most of my world travelling I wasn't a Catholic yet but I visited so many Catholic churches, both ancient and modern, that I am now able to look back and see that Catholic churches (as in, the buildings) come in such a wide variety that no one word can describe them.

On one end of the scale we have the super-decorated churches that contain so much sacred art that, upon stepping through the doors, your eyes begin to water.

On the other end of the scale we have nearly empty Catholic churches that, aside from the altar cloths and vessels, may only contain one or two old statues and some candles. The rest of the church is plain ~ often stone ~ and devoid of sacred art.

Is one type of Catholic church better then the other? There does seem to be this kind of idea floating around and it was (and still is) put into brutal action "in The Spirit of Vatican II."

Something that everyone needs to understand is this: The Vatican does not cut a check and send it to a parish and say, "Have at it! Decorate at your discretion!"

On the whole, Catholic churches are built, filled, and decorated by the people, for the people of each community. As we have seen, many communities have very rich parishoners that were more then happy to donate money ~ either just because, or in loving memory of a departed loved one ~ towards the construction and decoration of their parish churches.

Also, if you look closely while inside of decorated churches, you'll see that most of the art work and stained glass windows were commissioned not by the Catholic Church but by parishoners, usually in loving memory of a departed family member.

Each Catholic church belongs to its community ~ and not just its present community but also its past community.

Therefore no one has the right to go into a decorated Catholic church and tear out all of the artwork, high altars, statues, and stained glass windows "in the spirit of" anything.

Talk about some serious DISRESPECT, let alone base theft!

And this is exactly why people like myself are absoultely horrified by the gutting of Catholic churches. We are not idol-worshippers gasping out loud because our gods are being removed. No. Instead, we are made furious by the crimes being commited against all of those generations of Catholics who paid for (and often worked at!) the construction of their parish churches.

Somehow... some way... a minority of Liberals managed to get the power and the go-ahead to rip down and throw away that which did not belong to them ~ all while the majority of the parishoners totally and completely objected.

Now, if a parish church is plain and pretty much empty due to the fact that it was built and maintained by a community of humble means, there is no feeling of horror upon walking through the doors. That's because these churches are naturally plain. And they are lovely in their plain-ness, although I wouldn't say that they are "better" then decorated parishes.

And to be honest if someone went into a humble, plain Catholic church and started to decorate it to the high heavens that would just as much of a tradgedy as the gutting of wealthier parish churches.

The church where I became Catholic was one of the most beautifully decorated, eye-wateringly filled churches I had seen in a long time. I loved it. I loved walking through those doors, kneeling in my pew, and gazing upon the sacred art while my thoughts were lifted to heaven.

My present parish church is humble and plain. I love it. I love walking through those doors, kneeling in my pew (when capable) and gazing upon the plain space while my thoughts are lifted to heaven.

I have no idea if my present parish was gutted? If it was, the plain-ness would deffinately become artificial and sad. So that's why I haven't bothered to ask...

Guess what, "Spirit of Vatican II" people? Gutting Catholic churches and rendering them artificially plain will not make your parish better or more holy. It will not cause you or your fellow parishoners to grow closer to God. Doing such will only cause a lot of pain and resentment and create a big fat rift between yourselves and everyone else.

Like I stated at the beginning:

Plain isn't bad. But neither is it a way to make yourself holy. We always have to be very careful when we start to make our lives "plain" because we might be deluding ourselves into believing that our level of plain-ness equates to our level of holiness.

If you cannot worship God in a highly decorated church then guess what? The problem lies with you. Not the decorations. Obviously you are entering a church not for God but for some other, external reason ~ and you've made an Idol out of plain-ness.
(Obviously the same goes in the reverse: Be careful that you do not make an Idol out of decorated churches.)

We have no right to gut a decorated Catholic church that we did not pay for and we did not build. To do so is is a crime against those that worked so hard to build and decorate that church. It is also to engage in misguided Idolatry.

Returning to "traditional" Latin mass is not about "going back in time" at all...

"Fr Kramer especially emphasised that the restoration of the traditional form of the Roman Rite is not a matter of "going back" to the time before Vatican II."

(The above quote is from yet another fine post from Father over at His Blog That I Can't Spell.) (Let alone pronounce.)

One of the greatest misunderstandings that helps to maintain a rift between "traditionalist" Catholics and "progressive" Catholics is the idea that the "traditionalists'" desire to return to the time-tested ways of Holy Mother Church is a warped desire to "go back in time" and dwell in an out-of-touch-with-reality sense of nostalgia (sp?) of "the good old days."

That, somehow, we (especially we younger "traditional" Catholics) think that back in the "good ol' days" everything was wonderful and delightful and there were no problems. And that if we only went back to behaving and living like they did "back then", our lives would become full of roses and sunshine and we'd all get along and the Catholic Church would have no problems.

Wrong.

We "traditional" Catholics by no means believe any of those things. We are well grounded in reality ~ and this is exactly why we are pushing for a return to a mature living of the Catholic Faith.

We want to be grownup Catholics.

We are, to put it bluntly, sick and tired of the warm-fuzzy, childish, happy-clappy, emotional, "It's All About Me And My Feelings" approach to the Catholic Fath that has, if one merely takes a quick glance around, caused far more harm then good.

This same exact approach to the secular life has nearly destroyed our society. It has failed us on every level inside and outside of the Church. We're tired of it.

This perpetual rebellion against authority, be it civil or divine, promised everything but has given us nothing but pain and emptiness.

You older folks from the '60's and 70's and even the 80's, you've had your chance. You swept into Holy Mother Church under the banner of your "Spirit of Vatican II" and your (forced) experiment has failed. Miserably.

And now we are saying that it is time for you to bow out gracefully and accept the fact that the Kum By Yah approach to life just isn't working. And it never will. Because it goes so totally against the very Gospel itself.

Just a mere peek at what little that we Catholics are taught about the actual Faith is enough to show that this Liberal, emotional approach "In the Spirit of Vatican II" has done absolutely nothing for us.

We desire not to return to the "good old days" but to walk away from the "Me" centered "Spirit of Vatican II" and return to the Faith. And doing so requires that we deny ourselves, take up our crosses, and follow Christ.

Which is the opposite of what "The Spirit of Vatican II" requires.

Listen, folks, it's really simple:

There are neither Traditional Catholics or Liberal Catholics. There are just Catholics. And a "Catholic" is defined as those that obey the Church in everything without compromise.

And you are either Catholic or not Catholic. It's that simple.

One of the biggest steps that we need to take, as Catholics, is to remove the "Traditionalist" and "Liberal" labels. This allows two distinct types of Catholicism to exist. Which is wrong. The only Catholicism is the Catholicism instituted by Jesus Christ. We have absolutely no authority to create any other kind of Catholic Faith.

So, it's boils down to this:

You either submit to Holy Mother Church and do your very best to follow the Gospel with every fiber of your being...

Or you pick and choose how much you'll follow Jesus and rebel against those things which you, a mere sinful creation of the Creator, disagree with ~ and think, somehow, that you, a mere mortal, know better then God Himself.

You're either Catholic or more God then God.

Do what you want. It's totally up to YOU. But if you choose to walk the path of rebellion against Christ then step aside and quit trying to forcibly change Holy Mother Church to suit your rebellious, "I Know More Then God" desires.

That is all that we are asking.

To all of the wimpy Christians out there...

This post is for you!

I just bought a book written by Glenn Beck titled, "Common Sense." In it I came across a startling quote:

"The hottest place in Hell is reserved for those who remain neutral in times of great moral conflict." (Martin Luther King no less...)

I am becoming fed up to HERE with wimpy, spineless Christians that not only help Satan destroy our world, but persecute those Christians that have the courage to follow Christ. You whine, you cry, you carry on about "feeeEEEeeeling judged..."

Guess what, wimps? God Himself said, "So then because thou art lukewarm, and neither cold nor hot, I will spue thee out of my mouth." (Rev. 3:16)

Got that, ye wimpy fellow Christians? There'll be no place for you in the Kingdom if you remain sitting on the fence wringing your hands and "being nice" with your, "Personally I'm opposed to (name sin here) b-b-b-but I don't want to force my beliefs onto anyone else!"

(Translation: I'm a wimp! I'm too afraid to stand up for what I believe! I'm such a wimp that I'll deny God Himself every single time anyone challenges me about my Christian beliefs.)

and your classic line where you accuse those who are actually following Christ of "being legalistic."

Which mostly comes from the mouths of you wimpy female Christians out wearing your worldly clothing and living your worldly ways. Although you try and hide behind a smokescreen of "Christian Relativism" (what's right for you is right for you and what's right for me is right for me...) what you're really saying behind all of your excuses is, "I don't feel convicted by the Holy Spirit to love God...because I'm afraid. I'm afraid of what other people might say or do to me if I love God so much that I'll follow Him without compromise. Instead, I'll just sit here on the fence with one foot in the world..."

Heh! Well guess what again? God Himself has clearly stated that, "For whosoever will save his life shall lose it; but whosoever shall lose his life for my sake and the gospel's,the same shall save it. "

And goes on to say:

For what shall it profit a man, if he shall gain the whole world, and lose his own soul? Or what shall a man give in exchange for his soul? Whosoever therefore shall be ashamed of me and of my words in this adulterous and sinful generation; of him also shall the Son of man be ashamed, when he cometh in the glory of his Father with the holy angels.

Christ said to us, "Whosoever will come after me, let him deny himself, and take up his cross, and follow me."

Please, read that again dear wimps. Christ said that we are to DENY OURSELVES and TAKE UP OUR CROSS.

He never told us that following Him would be easy. God has been telling us from the very start that following Him would be a CROSS. We would suffer. We would be persecuted and hurt, rejected and ostracized, and even KILLED.

There's a war on, fellow Christians. A war for YOUR SOUL. So get with the program and toughen up. There is no time and no room for wimps ~ if you can't take the heat then get lost. Stop calling yourself "christian" and admit the truth to yourself and the rest of the world: You are of the world, not of Christ.

And that is because you're too afraid to deny yourself and take up your cross. You are so busy trying to save your social life that you're losing your very soul.

Worse of all, you're dragging so many down with you in the process ~ something for which you will have to give an accounting on judgement day.

If you call yourself Christian then have the courage to

FOLLOW CHRIST.

(And if I've hurt your tender feeeeEEEeeeelings, too bad. I don't care about your feelings. The only thing I care about is the salvation of your soul.)

Wow...

We've had visitors so I've been away.

We had a lovely Mennonite couple here ~ friends of ours ~ for a visit and so I've been away from blogging.

Visitors are always such a blessing!! :-)

Obama's speech to school children and the outright insulting of American parents...

We "right-wing domestic terrorists" are coming under fire from "the left" for supposedly hating Obama's speech to America's school children and declaring his speech to be dangerous and bad etc etc...

But that is not really the case. As Michelle Malkin puts it so well:

Yes, you missed the point.

It’s not the speech (as I pointed out last week), it’s the subtext.

It’s the radical activism of the White House Teaching Fellows who designed the education guides tied to Obama’s speech.

It’s the overzealousness of public school educators who have turned classrooms into Obama campaign offices...

Leave it to "the left" to get it all wrong in their rabid attempts at painting us "right wing" "conservatives" as a bunch of paranoid, racist kooks.

It gets even better! American parents, did you know that you basically suck at raising your own kids??

Read on:

An Obama supporter writes, of us "right wingers":

Too Many Kooks
Tunku Varadarajan, 09.07.09, 12:00 AM EDT
Obama’s school speech drives the right crazy.

Tunku Varadarajan goes on to insult American parents:

"Obama will, as we all know, address our kids–plenty of whom need a lesson or two on the subject, since they clearly don’t get it from their parents–on the virtues of study, education and hard work"

Because, you know, American parents are a bunch of useless slobs and they need the President of the United States to teach their kids to study, work hard, and, uh, wash their hands (???) ...

P.S. With regards to non-Catholic christians...

I by no way believe that "Protestants" (Reformation Christians, non-Catholic christians) should not exist.

The way I see it, you're not Catholic. Fine. No skin off of my back. I still see you and honor you as a brother or sister in Christ.

What gets on my nerves is that the majority of the time this additude is often not reciprocated and we Catholics are constantly coming under fire by non-Catholic christians. There's no sense of "Live and let Live" as in... we have our church and you have yours, God bless you and have a good day.

It would be much more christian if we could all "just get along." It would be much more peaceful if non-Catholic christianity could exist without having to constantly prove itself "right" at the expense of Catholics.

Great. I just purchased a bunch of anti-Catholic books full of lies!

Before I discuss the books in question I'd like to explain something first:

Like I've stated before: Reformation Christianity (a.k.a. Protestantism) is a version of the Christian faith that can only prop itself up by constantly trashing the Catholic Faith and Catholics. Hence the term "Protestant" ~ Protest-ant. In perpetual protest against the Catholic Church... Without Catholic-bashing, Reformation Christianity would not be able to justify its existence in any fashion. Not only that, but Reformation Christianity can only "prove" itself "right" by re-writing Christian history.

Personally I don't have anything against "Protestants" (Notice how so many Protestants no longer use that term? Hmmm. I wonder why?) but I do have a lot against anti-Catholicism because so much of the information being used to "prove" the Catholic Faith wrong and Reformation Christianity "right" is FALSE INFORMATION.

How many Protestants (even if you refuse to call yourself that) who adhere to Reformation Christianity have gone through your christian life not hearing about the woes and evils of the Catholic Faith? How many of the sermons you've heard, the books you've read, and everything else that has to do with your version of Christianity has been able to stand on its own two legs without having to depend on pointing fingers at Catholics and the Catholic Faith?

I'm in no way claiming that *all* Reformation Christians engage in spreading false information knowingly and willingly ~ they trust their leaders to tell the truth. And even many of their leaders don't even realize that what they are teaching is misinformation and re-written history. WHICH IS SAD because how many Christians are being made to despise Catholics for no reason what-so-ever??

Now, on to the books:

This is so typical of my luck. **Sigh**

I purchased a small library of Lamplighter Publishing's reprinted historical Christian novels thinking that my kids would enjoy hearing stories where they would learn morals and other good, Christian things.

Because... I'm not anti-Protestant by any means and I don't mind using non-Catholic Christian story books.

So you can imagine my groan of irritation as I read through book after book and find nothing but anti-Catholic trash. As in... downright LIES about the Catholic Faith, the Catholic Church, and Catholics themselves!

Here's a sampling of what's on tap in some of these books: (Taken from, "Faithful but not Famous", page 79...)

"Pardon, Monsieur; but is not this the same Book - the Scriptures - the Word of God, and commanded by our Lord Pope to be called the Holy Bible? And is itnot upon this that all the laws of the Church, as well as her doctrines and claims, are said to be founded?

Farel looked confused, and knew not how to reply. He had forgotten that the Church pretended to have this Word of God as her authority."

What trash! What absolute garbage! And this, written and openly published, by fellow Christians!

Hello! Those of you "Protestants" that know that you're lying?! What about the Ninth Commandment: "Thou shalt not bear false witness against they neighbors"???? You Reformation Christians that claim to love and obey the bible???

Colossians 3:9 "Lie not one to another, seeing that ye have put off the old man with his deeds;"

Lie not to one another ~ and exactly what is it that so many "Protestant" christians engage in constantly with regards to the Catholic Faith??

Here's just a wee tip to all of you non-Catholic Christians out there that adhere to the principles and theology of the Reformation, no matter what your chosen "denomination": If you promote or print outright LIES about other Christians ... you end up looking like A LIAR. And not a lot of people have respect for LIARS. Ok? And this is why Catholics like myself end up not taking so many "Protestants" very seriously! Because I have read countless books, many of which are aimed at Christian children, as well as countless magazines, tracts, and websites written by Reformation Christians that are packed full of misinformation and a blatant and dishonest re-writing of Christian history! In other words: LIES.

I've even had friends send me books full of lies about the Catholic Church and Christian history ~ I guess in the hopes that I'd be so ignorant that I'd buy it and convert away from the Catholic Church?? Or, more sadly, they don't even realize that the books they are passing along are full of dishonest nonsense?

To those of you that know what you are doing: You are giving a horrible witness of the Christian faith!

And many of these books I've purchased from Vision Forum no less! I couldn't even make it through the first chapters of this book before running into revisionist history as per Reformation Christianity. I ended up throwing it away because an otherwise beautiful story would be useless to share with my kids because they'd get so confused by all of the misinformation and lies!

And now these books have no value because what in the world will my children think if I get halfway through a "Protestant" book and have to say, "I'm sorry, kids, but this book is full of lies and misinformation about us Catholics and Christian history so I'm going to have to stop here and, uh, correct a few things..."

My children will grown up scorning the Christian faith and they'll see Christians as people that can't be trusted because they aren't afraid to outright LIE to themselves and others even about their own faith and Christian history!

**Sigh** I guess this is what I get for respecting and loving our "separated brethren" (i.e. Reformationist Christians)... so many of them obviously don't return the favour while 99.9% of their scorn is based on LIES and MISINFORMATION about us Catholics!! (Like those lovely Jack Chick tracts!!!!)

I'm not saying *all* non-Catholic christians feel this way about Catholics but far too many of them certainly do. This is why I roll my eyes and sigh when I hear from a Catholic friend that she or he "discovered the truth" and left the Catholic Church. And then they start spouting the usual propaganda ~ the untruths and misinformation, the re-written history, the outright lies ~ without even realizing what they are doing!

Maybe it'd be safer for Catholics and non-Catholics to avoid Reformation Christian books altogether? I've yet to read through an entire Reformation Christian magazine, book, tract, or website without being flooded with lies and misinformation about Catholics and Christian history.

Way to go, folks! There's nothing like painting Christians as a pack of hypocritical liars! No wonder people avoid churches and the faith like the plague...

"Those Duggars! They must be living off of taxes and donations...

...how else can they afford to raise all those kids? They are soooo irresponsible!!"

According to, I dunno, far too many people... the Duggars must be living off of someone! There's no way that a family can possibly raise 19 kids without having to leach off of the tax payers... like those serial single moms that keep popping out various kids from different daddies while demanding more and more welfare and tax money for support...

No one likes to consider the possibility that the Duggar family, like so many responsible, hard-working American families, started small and worked their way into that big house by spending responsibly, staying out of debt, living frugal, and being blessed countless times by God!

Mrs. Duggar is expecting child #19! Which to me is beyond AWESOME!

But to so many others is, oddly, "irresponsible."

I find it interesting that so many folks can flap their jaws with all manner of criticism yet how many of you have bothered to check the facts? I mean, the Duggars have a website where they have made their email and postal mailing address available! Mrs. Duggar has a blog where you can submit comments! They even wrote a detailed book! (Click here to buy it.) And a long-running reality TV show that shows their everyday lives!!!!!

What more could you ask for in order to get your facts straight?!

You know what? Ya'll just like to moan and whine. Having kids has become a cardinal sin and so the Duggars really get under your skin.

Well, here's a challenge: Try, uh, checking your facts before you flap your jaws. I'll even make your job easier by providing some links... (if you can be bothered to actually make the effort to move your finger enough to click on them...)

The Duggar Family via The Learning Channel

Mrs. Duggar's Blog

Yes, I know, Mr. and Mrs. Duggar are evil for having "so many kids" and yeah, according to our modern times, 19 children do not have the right to exist... neither do any more then 1 or 2 kids in any other family...

...but when you're a bitter, old, lonely woman living off of cat food in a freezing apartment... I'll bet you'll be demanding that the Duggar's kids, and everyone else's kids, pay to take care of you!
At that point in your life all of those tax-paying now-adult kids that were born of all of us "right wing domestic terrorists", us fanatical, hateful, "extremists"... will look like a good idea!

And who is going to look irresponsible then? Eh? You with your hand sticking out demanding tax money to survive? Or those elderly being cared for by their own families without having to leach off of the tax-payers?

To serve others rather then to dwell in the "ME" culture...

Is surprisingly fulfilling. But don't hold your breath because no one in the mainstream pop-culture is ever going to let you in on this little secret.

One of these days you're going to become an old woman. Who will you be? And, most worrisome of all, who will be with you?

"Being a housewife is an illegitimate profession... The choice to serve..."

Today we women face a lot of fear. And one of those fears is a fear of service ~ a terror of living beyond ourselves because in so doing we'll "lose our identity" and become unfulfilled drones, slaves, by default, to whomever it is that we are serving...

But...are women placed in a vulnerable and unfulfilling situation if they live a life of service to their families, communities, and churches? (If they are women of faith...)

It's easy to think so, isn't it? In our modern minds service = slavery. Drudgery. A lowly existence where no one respects or values us.

But is this really the case? And if so, why do vivacious, intelligent, healthy people live lives of service to others? Why has a life of service to others always held up as the ideal throughout history?

Obviously the idea of "living to serve others" has been, many times, taken to unhealthy extremes by individuals and those in spiritual authority.

And so it is not surprising to find that there is a legitimate fear of "living to serve others" in our culture and Western societies.

If done for the proper reasons and motivations, to live your life so that you serve others out of love for them and for God does not turn you into a self-hating second class nobody: a miserable lump that never expands your mind or enjoys anything that is even remotely pleasant.

It's important to understand something vital: being a "good person" is not a points-based system where you rack up X amount of "good person points" for every "good deed" that you engage in during your lifetime so that you can obtain some kind of reward at the end.

Because if you take that particular approach then you're really only serving yourself. You're only doing "good" in order to gain a personal reward. You don't really care about those whom you serve ~ they are a means to an end. Everyone else sees you for what you are: a self-serving hypocrite.

The Bible, especially the New Testament, is full of instructions for Christians to live as servants, to move through live with a "servant's heart" and to serve others. "Love thy neighbor as you love yourself." ... "Do unto others as you would have them do unto you."

There's not a lot of space or time for "Me, Myself, and I" within the pages of scripture.

This scares a lot of women.

And this is because the common misunderstanding is that the Bible enslaves people and turns them into mindless drones that spend their miserable lives lapping at everyone else's feet. Are Christians then a group of nutjobs that need to be saved from themselves? Are housewives deserving of society's pity and rescue?

Well... feet do play a part in the Bible such as when Jesus stoops to the ground and washes the feet of His disciples. But is He doing so out of a misplaced, unhealthy sense of self-hatred? No. He did so in order to show His disciples that He practiced what He preached: everyone is called to be a servant of all.

There are a lot of christan writings that call for a hatred of self but these can be seriously misunderstood, especially today in the throes of our "Me" culture where we have been taught, since childhood, to persue personall fulfillment of "me and my needs" ~ no matter the cost to the rest of society.

The extremely simple explanation of "dying to self" and "hatred of self" boils down to this: You grow up and accept the fact that you cannot demand immediate gratification for your every whim and desire. That your wants are not "rights" and that, like it or not, you are not the only person on this planet. Therefore in order to achieve and maintain harmony you must think of others and not just live for yourself.

You don't actually hate yourself in the sense that, "I'm a horrible person!" but you cease to place yourself always at the front of the line. More often then not you back off and allow others to go ahead of you. Which goes counter to our modern culture.

When you begin to live outside of yourself you notice a sudden and unexpected side effect: all of your "problems", all of those things you used to moan and whine about with your friends over lattes and bagels... they begin to fade into the background. Many of them disapear! You actually find yourself feeling... better. More settled. Less miserable and victimized by life and society.

The thing is, our culture has it all wrong. Everything is backwards: what is good is bad and what is bad is good. Giving of ourself is a sin and being self-centered is a virtue.

But if this is right... why are so many women so miserable today??

If we love someone then we are capable of cheerfully doing things for them witout feeling like victims. If we serve our mom or our best friend or our grand parents do other people accuse us of being unhealthy? Oppressed? Incapable of fulfilling ourselves?

Hardly. More often then not they say we are a "good" person.

The same exact logic applies to a housewife serving her husband and her children as well as her family, her community, and her church. (If she's a woman of faith.) Only this was, and still is, totally lost on Feminists.

Women used to be urged to aim towards the healthy well-rounded sense of virtue and service out of love for others. Now women are urged, nay, practically dragged, into a life of vice and self-service.

Now we are urged to serve ourselves, put ourselves first, and run as far away from service to others as humanly possible. (Unless that service earns us a pay check and social status.)

On the flip side, let's take a look at a life of service to others from another angle:

If I, a housewife, scrub the toilets and do the laundry, vacuum the carpets, and make delicious home-cooked meals for my family... aren't I also doing all of this for myself as well? Don't I get to enjoy the clean house? The clean laundry? The delicious meals? The satisfaction of a job well done?

It's not as if I plunk dinner down on the table and then leave and go sit in a old shack where I eat a rubbery TV dinner from the microwave while my family enjoys all of the fruits of my labors without me!

So at the very basic brass tacks level, the idea that a housewife is some kind of unrewarded slave that is chained to her housework is... incredibly immature. Personally I cannot believe that anyone, even the earliest Feminists, could think that housewives were getting absolutely nothing out of the deal. That women, raised to live beyond just themselves, were "oppressed" and, by default of being born a woman, automatically miserable victims who would only be saved by being able to abandon the home, obtain a college education, hammer away at a career, and sleep around.

I find it very interesting that, for some reason, if a single woman cleans her own apartment and cooks her meals and does her laundry she's "liberated" but if a woman cleans her family's home, cooks meals for her family, and does her family's laundry she's "oppressed."

That a career woman, who is serving her boss, is liberated but a wife that is serving her family is oppressed.

Our natural urgings as women are to pair off with a man and have children and to make a home. Any home. Even if that home is a tiny apartment in the ghetto at the center of some big city. The Feminists have done their best to destroy our natural urges and make us believe that they are unnatural and oppressive.

If a woman does not feel the natural urge to have kids and be a homemaker this does not mean that she's some kind of abnormal freak. All through history there were women that never married and never had children. "Old Maids" they were called during the warped Victorian age ~ an insult intended to show these women that they had no respectable place in society. This is the last thing that we need to repeat today in this day and age!

The only reason that I blog is so that I can get women to think. Get them to reach within themselves and think hard about their lifestyle choices ~ are they truly making informed choices or are they following the party line that has been drummed through their skulls since their earliest years?

If you choose a lifestyle, especially a lifestyle that goes counter to your feminine nature, I urge you to dig deep within yourself and make certain that you've chosen this lifestyle because you truly want it ~ and not because someone else wants it for you and they are there in the back of your mind nagging away in a little cartoon thought bubble. "Do this or else you're wrong and you have Victorian-era hangups! Do this or else you're a chilly prude! Do this or else you're oppressed! Do this or else you'll never receive any respect from others and you'll be a FREAK!"

When we live a life of (healthy!) service to others, we achieve balance. This is because we are pulled out of ourselves and our focus is broadened rather then narrowed. We develop into multi-faceted human beings and life a full, rich life that does not revolve soley around the futility of trying to keep up with the latest popular trends, fashions, and all of the accompanying peer pressures.

In this way we are actually protecting ourselves from those "thought bubbles" that have been planted in the backs of our minds by the Feminist and Liberal ideologies being rammed down our throats since early girlhood. We are protecting ourselves from being Sheeple. We are actually living life as strong, liberated women that are not afraid to be true to themselves rather then stuck in the "Me" culture rut, constantly spinning our wheels as we try to find that mytical place of happiness and fulfillment that the Feminists keep promising we'll find if only...

If only we do exactly as they say.

Freedom, Liberty, and Equality for ALL! Not just Feminists and Liberals...

"...under my principles, which are based on the U.S. Constitution, your principles are free to exist as long as they do not negate my natural rights. I do not think you would be so generous..."

The above quote is from a commentor on the Michelle Malkin blog and I couldn't help but share it because it sums up my aversion towards Feminism/Liberalism perfectly.

I disagree with a lot of lifestyle choices. But disagreement is not a threat to anyone as long as, so saith the person above, my principles do not negate anyone's natural rights.

This is exactly what Feminism and Liberalism have done and are continuing to try and do ~ using the courts of law negate other people's natural rights. Using our public schools to indoctrinate boys and girls into the Feminist/Liberal ideology so that said children will grow up into adults that never think to be concerned that their natural rights have been and still are being negated.

After all, if you create millions of drones that toe your party line because they don't know of any other choices, then they'll never challenge the fact that you are stripping them of their natural rights.

I'll post one simple quote that very tidily sums up the mindset of the Feminist movement, an ideology that does not want to SHARE this world, but to dominate it and force everyone else to obey their world-view:

"No woman should be authorized to stay at home to raise her children. Society should be totally different. Women should not have that choice, precisely because if there is such a choice, too many women will make that one." -Simone de Beauvoir

The above quote is so powerful because it shows so clearly how Feminists recognize what is natural and then work hard to destroy that which is natural with that which is unnatural - by forcibly removing the freedom to choose.

Yes, the quote above involves the topic of housewives (such as myself) but this same mindset, this same aversion to what is natural, is to be found all through the Feminist/Liberal ideologies. And they are not above using the courts of law to try and replace the natural with the unnatural by force.

With regards to women staying home, the Feminists helped force women out of the home and into the work force by using the courts to remove alimony. Since then they have utilized our public school system to program girls and women into thinking that college-and-career is the only viable choice on tap.

"Being a housewife is an illegitimate profession... The choice to serve and be protected and plan towards being a family-maker is a choice that shouldn't be. The heart of radical feminism is to change that." (Vivian Gornick, feminist author, University of Illinois, "The Daily Illini," April 25, 1981.)

Again, I am only supplying quotes about housewives but they display enough of the Feminist mindset to be sufficient for a mere blog post. But re-read the above:

"Being a housewife is an illegitimate profession..."

Perhaps the above isn't being said word-for-word in our schools and through the media but that exact message is being taught to girls and boys (and men and women) all the way through college.

So is the message that marriage is bad, that virginity is bad, that childbearing and child rearing is bad...

All that is natural is being rewritten as unnatural and the Feminists/Liberals have been using the courts of law to take away our natural rights and replace them with their unnatural demands.

Sure, sure, if you talk to the "average" Feminist and Liberal they'll claim that they don't mind if people choose to do their own thing ~ including becoming housewives and parents and remaining virgins until marriage... Same thing if you talk with the average "I'm not a Feminist" man or woman on the street. "I don't care if people do their own thing..."

But the social presure placed on women and men to avoid that which is natural and embrace that which goes against our very nature is very real and always present. Just try and be a virgin with dreams and goals of marrying and having children! And, if you are a woman, staying home to raise the kids and care for hearth-and-home! Just try it and see how fast those that "don't care" when put on the spot actually do care an do disagree and do think that Feminism needs to "change that" and liberate you from your crazy ideas!

Perhaps your average person is not standing before a mic chanting Feminist rhetoric but they will still bully anyone and everyone that tries to "do their own thing" via criticism, public humiliation, ostracizm, and other peer-pressure techniques. And most will do this without ever considering the fact that they, man or woman, are behaving just like a "radical" Feminist!

And why is this?

Because Feminism is so deeply intrenched in the minds of so many of our fellow women and men that millions behave as Feminists without even thinking about it. The majority would not identify as Feminists but thye have been so well programed to spew Feminist-think without giving it a second thought.

And this right here is the crux of the issue: Millions of men and women in the West, and also spreading around the globe, living, eating, breathing, and spewing Feminism without even realizing that this is what they are doing.

Just ask the average young man/college man if they'd be happy if their wife (present or future) was a housewife... as in, a woman-with-no-income that stays home ("doesn't work") and thus does not bring in a pay check. Would he be ok with this? But most importantly of all, would he respect his wife? Or would he resent her choice because "...Being a housewife is an illegitimate profession..." ?

Again, ask the average guy on the street if he would accept, without resentment, his girlfriend remaining a virgin until the two of them were married.

Ask him if he'd even get married...

I'm not trying to pick on men or make them out to be jerks ~ I'm just trying to show how deeply entrenched the unnatural Feminist mindset has become in our society. Because even MEN, as in not-women, are saturated with Feminism. (Not all men of course but far too many men.)

My point in "picking on men"? Feminism has even been able to destroy the natural desires of men.

That is scary. It started with women and has ended with men. The natural is now seen as wrong and the unnatural is widely accepted as the norm. Not by everyone of course, but by far too many. (**Sigh** I have to keep making this disclaimer for all of the hyper-sensatives out there that will take my statements personally, as if I'm writing TO THEM...)

Meanwhile the Feminists and Liberals continue to use our courts of law to further negate more and more natural rights and force their unnatural ideology down the throats and into the lives of everyone around them.

(And saying so makes me hateful?)

Folks, be who you want to be, do what you want to do (within reason, of course. Don't go hurting people!) but make certain that you are actually making informed choices and not just doing because that's what you were always told to do.

Have the courage to go your own way, regardless of how anyone else reacts. Obviously I want everyone on this planet to be a devout Catholic ~ but I'll never use the courts of law or the classrooms to try and force this onto everyone else! Don't let yourself be forced into the Feminist/Liberal ideologies ~ and don't let the Feminists and Liberals force your kids and/or society into living their ideology.

Freedom. Liberty. Equality.

We don't have any of that right now.

P.S. My husband and I were driving past an average little neighborhood containing multiple houses and yards ~ a normal average place. I said to husband, "I'm willing to bet there are either no Feminists living in that neighborhood or very few. But! I'm willing to bet that the majority of people dwelling in those houses are living the Feminist/Liberal ideology without even realizing it."

That's what disturbs me so much... the blind adherence to two very damaging and controlling ideologies by otherwise intelligent, well-educated, non-radical people...

I am against Feminism and I support the Men's Rights Movement ~ but even I have my limits...

Yes, I can hear all of the whining and moaning about "shaming language" and "Coffee Catholic is a Feminist and no better then those other man-haters."

I can hear all of the griping and moaning about how I'm "no friend of men" and this and that but guess what, folks?

The truth needs to be said just the same. So if you feel offended, stuff it. I don't have time for your self-pity and delusions of "Men are innocent and only women are to blame..."

Something I wrote to a fellow non-Feminist that I thought I would stick here on my blog so I could get it off my chest. Because you know what? I have serious concerns about what kind of world my children are going to inherit.

MRA ~ Mens Rights etc.

I keep seeing something in the MRA that really makes me mad ~ this persistant idea that men are somehow innocent bystanders, sitting on the sidelines all baffled and not knowing why and how many women are behaving the way they behave. NONE of the MRA blogs have ever touched on the fact that so many men, men, men pressure women so much to have sex! To the point of hounding and harassing! And that these men don't only pressure, they harass and verbally abuse women that DONT sleep with them! And tell lies about them and gossip about them and make work, school, college, and social settings downright hostile environments for women that don't want to sleep around.

Yeah, I can hear the denial already. But how many of you men will tolerate a girlfriend that is saving herself for marriage and will not sleep with you unless you are wed? Eh? And I'm not talking you older, jaded guys ~ I'm talking about you younger men, you PUAs that are still out there in the arena being single and having fun.

How many of you would allow your girlfriend to be a virgin - but not only that, but would honor her choice and respect her decision without guilt-tripping or pressuring her to put out?

Yeah, you get my point. The pressure is on and we women are at the receiving end of it ~ all while being bashed and trashed if we do sleep with our boyfriends. We have an odd environment to contend with: Remain chaste and you're despised, sleep around and you're despised.

Like I've asked before ~ What the HECK do you men WANT?! Make up your minds!

I've brought this up, this relentless pressure for sex from men, time and again on MRA blogs only to get told off (big surprise!!) and made instantly into a man-hating Feminist and, "no better then all those other b*tches...)

If a woman doesn't want to have sex WHY DO SO MANY OF YOU MEN CONTINUE TO PRESSURE HER AND/OR DEGRADE AND HUMILIATE HER?

Do you Men's Rights activists have an answer for that? A comment? A solution?? Because, like it or not, that pressure is there ~ it is real and it is coming from MEN and it hurts us women, especially those of us that don't want to put out to every man that asks!

On MarkyMark's blog: a post about how there are no ladies. Well guess what? THERE ARE NO GENTLEMEN EITHER. This I've learned first-hand. I was in the military! I was in college! I've been in the work place! I used to go out with friend! Been there, done that, have at least ten of the t-shirts. I don't blog/comment from behind the walls of a convent. I've had to deal with, on a daily basis, the raw nasty hatred that men have for virgins and ladies that don't put out. You men can deny it but it's there. It's the truth and we women know it. And it's not just the odd guy here and there ~ it's so many of you. WHY?!

And why do so many of you all of a sudden become seekers-of-a-virgin, a "good woman", later in life?? Few of you can hardly stand that virgins exist and then, all of a sudden, virgins become the ideal?!

Which brings us to...

All this bashing on "skanks and whores" and yet who helps to make these women skanks and whores? What, they have sex on their own? By themselves? Sorry, guys ~ but you have helped create skanks and whores and if you've a pile of lovers in your past then you better start calling yourself a skank and whore as well! You're just as disgusting! You've dipped it God-knows-where and that's why women like me WOULDN'T TOUCH YOU WITH A TEN FOOT POLE. We see you for what you are: just as much of a nasty STD factory as the various women you've scored! So if you're going to bash and trash on skanky women and you're a skank yourself at least do us all the favour of stepping down from your high horse!
Think I'm just being a man-hater? Try this: ask a man something before you sleep with him. "Do you have the results of a recent STD test?" Watch how quickly he freaks out on you, rips into you like you are some kind of horrible person, and then runs off to dip it in the next woman...

As far as skanks and whores go, both women and men are equal on that playing field! So lads, don't get too high and mighty because if you've slept around you're just as nasty. (Not all women or men are skanks blah, blah, blah... have to say this disclaimer before I get a bunch of whiney women commenters. "I'm not a skank! How dare you suggest that I am a skank? You're so fat and stooopid, Coffee Catholic... You're so hateful...")

Anyway...

Which takes us to the next topic: How many of these MRA bloggers are sitting down and talking to women about why they sleep around? How many of you Men's Rights guys are actually trying to discover the crux of the problem so that we can find a solution? How many MRA lads are reading books like, "Girls Gone Mild" and "A return to modesty" and reading and hearing about how so many women and girls DON'T THINK THEY HAVE THE RIGH TO SAY NO TO SEX WHEN A MAN DEMANDS IT???

How many of you MRA guys realize that from every angle women and girls are getting sex shoved down their throats? That the Feminists get to us young ~ that YOUR DAUGHTERS are being brainwashed on a daily basis at school by the Feminists (and what are you doing to protect them??) How many of you MRA men know and admit that even in grade school very young girls are being damaged with graphic sex education and young teens are being told to GO HAVE SEX or else something is WRONG with them?

And how many of you MRA men care enough to stand up and do something about this? Because it's your RIGHT to protect your daughters, your sisters, your neices...

I know. I've been there. I've heard it and experienced it all. WE ARE NOT ALLOWED TO BE INNOCENT OR PURE OR GOOD. And so many of you men don't make it any easier for us so don't try and play like you don't know what's going on.

To me, we have a social problem, not a women-only problem. This problem was started and perpetuated by Feminists and Feminism, yes ~ but WHERE WERE OUR FATHERS AND BROTHERS? None of the men protected us from the Feminists in the 60's, or later, for us younger women, in the 80's/90's. Fathers? Brothers? Uncles? Where were they? TOO MANY OF THEM WERE OFF SLEEPING AROUND WITH THE GIRLS!!!!! Either that or they were wimps! (I can hear the men: Oh noooooo... shaming language!! Not thaaaat!)

To be frank, I see the MRA movement becoming just as much of a hate movement as the Feminist movement. And because of this, by default, the men are going to prove the Feminists right, that "the Patriarchy hates women and wants to oppress them" ~ this is going to become REALITY. There are a lot of good men fighting a good fight but even they get caught up in the "We men are so innocent and you skanky women are to blame for EVERYTHING" mantra.

There is far too much innocence assumed for men by far too many men in the MRA movement ~ and far too much blame being assigned to women only. I still live with the scars of spending my single years HATED and OSTRICIZED by MEN for being a virgin, for being chaste, for NOT being a skank. That humiliation and torment leaves us women traumatized! All of the sexual harassment from foul-mouthed and often times physically abusive boys that I had to put up with as a child in school... then the pressure and constant public humiliation later as a chaste adult... BY MEN just as much as by Feminists!

Yeah, thanks, guys. Pardon me if I don't see you as oh-so-innocent when it comes to the ruination of our very culture!

And as for the Divorce thing: The MRAs carry on whining and crying about women divorcing their husbands. Well guess what? HOW MANY MARRIED MEN BEHAVE LIKE MEN? And how many of them are still trying to live the single-boy life full of video games and cookouts with their buddies and being obsessed with "hobbies" that take them away from the home, their wives, and their kids? Sorry folks but marriage is a two-way street. And I have a hard time believing that ONLY WOMEN cause marriage to be miserable and all divorced women asked for divorce because they were bored and wanted to go chase an "Alpha."

WAKE UP AND FACE REALITY, GUYS! The divorce laws and child support laws and child custody laws are crap and yes, they do need to be changed so that they are equal and fair ~ and actually looking out for the best interest of the child.

But the failure of marriage is not only to be blamed on women. YOU BOY-MEN THAT REFUSE TO GROW UP ARE JUST AS MUCH TO BLAME. (Oh noooooo! Shaming language! Not thaaaaat!!)

I didn't stay single for so long just because I wasn't having sex. I had plenty of marriage offers. I haven't always been FAT AND UGLY (another thing MRAs go on and on about, how women over 20-something have "fading looks" and this and that, like we're all ugly, disgusting HAGS! And what? Older men are all studs?! They're all a catch?!) I stayed single for so long because I couldn't find a MAN. I didn't want to set up house and have kids with a BOY-man. I ended up marrying a man 14 years my senior FOR A REASON.

And yeah, I did become fat and yeah, that was a turn-off to men. But guess what? I'M NOT IN DENIAL ABOUT THAT. If I have the guts to admit MY faults and MY failings towards our society, why can't you MRAs? (Oh nooooooo! Not SHAMING LANGUAGE! Anything but thaaaat!)

(This is on constant repeat because any time you try and point out to men THEIR part in this big mess they blow it off by claiming we women are using "shaming language" ~ the most recent cop out being employed on MRA blogs.)

The MRA blogs, they deny this. They don't ever discuss this and if you make a comment about Boy-men they go on and on about, "Women using shaming language" and all that crap. Deny, deny, deny ~ MRA has a lot of excellent points. The MRA has a lot of valid complaints. But the MRA also has a lot of BULL CRAP going on from blog to blog.

I fear what's going to happen to women and girls once these men start getting more and more power in the courts of law. It's not going to be pretty ~ and so many MRAs have stated this with glee! They can't wait to HURT WOMEN and MAKE US PAY for Feminism ~ even though many of them have done their bit to help destroy our society. When I see that gleam, that fanatical joy of how women are going to suffer and pay and hurt at the hands of the MRA... yeah, it makes me sick. It makes me want to stop having kids.

On so many of the MRA blogs, even the good ones, I see a lot of the same hateful, whiney, illogical, spiteful, shame-and-blame denial shit that I see on Feminist blogs and in Feminist publications. This is only going to further destroy our society.

Why do I care about the MRA movement? Because I'm raising a daughter and I might end up with a son or two as well. I despise this Feminist culture we live in but what do my kids face in the future? A change from man-hating to woman-hating??? A world full of "Playas" looking to "****" my girls but not marry them? (I see this on MRA blogs everywhere: "Women are such skanks. All women are to blame for our sufferings. Women are just there for me to ****. They just need to shut up and keep their legs open...")

Uh huh. That's it: Prove the Feminists right. Become The Patriarchy. Make it a reality and prove those bra-burners RIGHT.

Is the future full of boys and men that will hate my girls and depise them while relentlessly pressuring and harassing them for sex and then being cruel and nasty when they don't put out? If my children remain virgins will they be despised by the same men that despise skanks and then, later, whine about there being no virgins??

MAKE UP YOUR MINDS, MEN!

I was a lady. I kept my legs crossed. Guess what? There was no respect. It got me nowhere. The most famous lines I was told again and again over nearly 20 years of living as a single woman was, "There's something wrong with you." and "You need to get laid!" as well as, "You think sex is DIRTY."

ALL SAID, UNINVITED, OFTEN IN PUBLIC (even in the work place!) IN FRONT OF LOTS OF OTHER PEOPLE BY MEN.

Just try asking a man not to swear or say crude jokes in front of you. Just try and be a lady ~ and watch the abuse pour out of his mouth! If a man is being crude in front of a woman he obviously is not open to the idea of that woman being a lady ~ regardless if she is or isn't a genuine lady! Just as with virgins, there is no room for ladies in our society.

I'm not about man-hating or overreacting to men gawking or making comments or otherwise being men. But I have mental SCARS from the abuse and harassment I've received at the hands of men. The MRAs can deny it all that they want but I know the truth and so do so many other women. Many of us are non-Feminists but we are not woman-haters either. We see that men are being treated like trash in our culture and 2nd class citizens in our courts of law. We see the way that fathers are treated and boys are hated for being normal males. We disagree wholeheartedly with Feminism. But I for one do not buy the idea that men are somehow totally innocent of any wrong-doing towards women. Our society is in tatters because of BOTH men and women going on a wacked-out sexual revolt post-60's.

yeah, yeah, I'm not saying ALL men and women. Get over it.

You're hard pressed to find a virgin woman these days, right? But how many virgin men are there out there saving themselves from marriage? I have a hard time respecting the rants of MRAs that have spent their younger years sleeping around only to turn around and rail against women that sleep around and demand to know why there are no virgins any more.

There's a huge imbalance and we're not going to solve the ills of our society by assigning blame to only one camp. I've fessed up to my mistakes and my failings and I am doing my best to set things right ~ and so are so many of my fellow non-Feminists. I think it's time that many of you whining, griping men do the same. And then, hopefully, we can actually MOVE FORWARD and find some solutions. As it stands, too many non-Feminists are in a rut spinning their wheels ~ or sliding back towards another hate movement.

I'm all for Mens Rights ~ but only if this takes place with a healthy dose of reality. It's time to stop playing all of these reindeer games and get with the program!

"An important difference between the Mafia and feminism would be, that the Mafia merely preys upon society while leaving the social structure intact, whereas feminism tends to rot the essential fabric of society in a way that would do mortal damage. Hence, in the case of feminism, damage is projected on a grand scale—albeit under color of legality"

Read the rest here.

This entire blog is an attempt at creating one big WAKE UP call...

First, a quick summary of what I'm on about with this post:

No man or woman is an island. Consider that the next time you think, "This is MY choice and it only affects ME..." That is a lie. Do you truly believe in liberation and freedom? Love? Then take a careful assesment of your own life and see if the ripples you send out are spreading love, freedom, and liberation ~ or self-destruction and enslavement to damaging ideologies.

One kind of ripple we send out is "Peer Pressure." Is the pressure you are putting on your peers a constructive kind of pressure that builds others up and strengthens our society? Or does the pressure you place on your peers push them into rebellious behaviors and mindsets that tear everyone down?

As for you, personally: Are you truly "tough"? Are you really a strong person? Or are you a wimp underneath your rebellious persona, always going along with the rest of the Sheeple because you don't dare do what you know is right for fear of ridicule and ostricization? Fear of lonliness? Fear of having all of your distractions removed so that you're forced to face yourself?

Now:
I found a fantastic essay that outlines many of the same exact reasons that I reject Leftist ideologies such as Feminism, Liberalism, and the "Law of Tolerance."

Here is a striking tidbit that spells out what I've been saying all along: (bolds, emphasis, and comments mine...)

"What the radicals hate is that the Church proposes moderation where they would have extremism, (and, ironically, we Christans are the ones labeled "extremists" ~ a term hijacked from 9/11...) that it proposes peaceful negotiation where they would have unprovoked war, that it proposes love where they would have nothing but raw, unfiltered hatred. (A quick look at the Leftist "arguments" will show that this statement is correct. Rather then a logical debate, the Left utilizes personal attacks and all manner of childish accusations.)To be sure, they feel completely justified in their hatred of the oppressor; to not hate the oppressor is to forever be his slave. In the Christian’s plea for love and mercy the radical leftist sees the greatest obstacle to his plans. (Ever notice that Leftists, including Feminists and other "victim groups" such as homosexual activists and Liberal Catholics, seem to ilve lives of endless oppression? And that it is very black-and-white: "We MUST erradicate anything, any one, that oppresses us!!" There is no concept of live-and-let live. No, the courts of law are the Leftist's best friend. Through the courts they push for the creation of laws that legislate against anyone that disagrees with them. Such as... "Hate Laws" ~ a fancy term for thought control, for laws that say, "You will be punished for disagreeing with me.")

In fact it is when the radical leftist speaks of love and compassion, more so than when he is speaking of revolutionary violence, that we ought to be truly frightened. According to this malformed “love”, (Read the following very carefully because this is what I've been trying to get across to you, my readers, for years:) [According to this malformed "love",] what people need is to be set loose from all social convention and most of all, guilt and remorse. Nature itself must be torn down and all human relationships must be completely “free”, by which they mean, subordinated entirely to pleasure, regardless of the social consequences. This weak and pathetic “love” is never allowed to “judge”, even when a lifestyle is manifestly unnatural and self-destructive. (This being my #1 disagreement with so much that the Left offers our societies and our world: self-destruction under the guise of "freedom" and "liberation." My hope is not to control people but to WAKE PEOPLE UP. Self-destruction is never liberating. Instead, it destroys us all.) Love is equated with tolerance, and tolerance must be extended to every disgusting practice imaginable, provided that it “doesn’t hurt anyone” (that is, cause direct physical pain) or for the more sophisticated leftist, reinforce in anyway the dominant power relationships. Love also means, to this tortured soul, never holding anyone to account for anything they do, since as a materialist-determinist, the leftist radical believes that free will is yet another Christian invention designed so that old men in robes could assign “blame” and retain their power..." (Sadly, the Left is incapable of considering the possibility that too much "freedom" and "liberation" actually does hurt people and does cause needless suffering and that when "outsiders" point this out, they are not trying to control everyone but instead are attempting to help people step off of the self-destruction/society-destroying merry-go-round.)

Those who embrace (or blindly follow, due to brainwashing as children) Leftist ideologies (Feminists, Liberals, etc.) live in this fantasy world where they tell themselves, "This is my choice. This is my life. I'm not hurting anyone eles." They refuse to see the truth for what it is: our every action is like tossing a stone into a pond ~ the ripple effect spreads far and wide and effects an amazing amount of people around us. The ripples add up and eventually begin to damage and destroy entire societies... And people like myself are not trying to control the world or personally attack individuals ~ we are trying our best to open people's eyes and get them to take a good, hard look at how their individual choices and actions are hurting them and hurting their entire societies.

As for this woman, I cannot embrace lifestyles that promotes the destruction of society. Yes, there were bad Catholics that hijacked the Catholic Faith so that they could kill or control others "in the name of God." But guess what? This does not invalidate the Catholic Faith itself. The Catholic Faith never said for these bad people to do these evil things. And if you think that is the case, you have obviously let yourself be TOLD what to think rather then finding out for yourself.

Slave.

And those bad people, if they remained bad, are roasting in hell. That's the beauty of divine justice. So I refuse to punish good Catholics now for the sins of bad Catholics all through history ~ the bad guys are getting their just recompense. It's not my job to wear their sin on my sleeve.

The UN wants to teach your 5 year old...

How to masturbate!

"Under the U.N.'s voluntary sex-ed regime, kids just 5-8 years old will be told that 'touching and rubbing one's genitals is called masturbation' and that private parts 'can feel pleasurable when touched by oneself.'

By the time they're 9 years old, they'll learn about 'positive and negative effects of 'aphrodisiacs,' and wrestle with the ideas of "homophobia, transphobia and abuse of power."

"Health experts" (there's always some creepy expert lurking in the shadows...) say that, "...educating kids at a younger age helps better steer them into adulthood."

No. You're wrong, folks. Dead wrong.

Do you know what "steers them into adulthood"? Being taught self-discipline and self-restraint so that SEX DOES NOT TAKE OVER THEIR EVERY THOUGHT AND ACTION.

What ever happened to teaching kids about how to balance a budget? Shop on a tight income for healthy foods? Cook those healthy foods? Pay their bills and otherwise function as a mature, responsible aduilt in society?

Since when did unlimited personal gratification of one's lusts become the ultimate goal of adulthood?!

Wouldn't children be better served if they were prepared for the real world of adulthood, instead of being drowned in relentless sex education??

I know that this is a radical concept, possibly even oppressive... but you have to be a blind fool not to see that our society today is so totally obsessed with SEX SEX SEX that this is just about the only thing at the top of everyone's mind. Including children who should be enjoying their childhood, not obsessing about their looks or their slutty Bratz dolls.

What we have today is a society of sex slaves ~ so many people so hard driven by their need and desire for sex that their lives become almost one-dimensional in their quest to satisfy their throbbing lust.

Is there anything wrong with sexual desire? Absolutely not! But what is wrong is when sex becomes such a preoccupation that it destroys relationships and societies.

Just look around! What do you see? What do you hear? In advertisements, magazines, on TV shows, movies, in the music, on the radio... do we ever get a break from SEX SEX SEX?

How many women hate their bodies becaus they don't feel SEXY enough? How many women feel like ugly failures because they're not getting SEX? By what do we measure a woman's worth? By her personality and ability to handle every day life with maturity? Or by her SEX APPEAL?

As this sex-obsessed indoctrination of our children sinks to lower and lower age-levels we are doing much more harm then good. Why is this? Because we are starting the sex-obsession earlier and earlier, that's why! We are forcibly removing our children's childhood and thus removing any choice on their parts with regards to where THEY want to steer their own lives. We are saying to them, "This is the only road you're allowed to travel so get moving!"

It is never right to lead anyone, adult or child, into a life of sexual servitude. Which is precisely what is taking place right now to girls in the West. Think I'm nuts? Fine. Can you tell me how many girls and women feel that they have the right to have a relationship with a man without having sex with him?

Yeah, my thoughts exactly. All that this "sex ed" has managed to achieve is creating several generations of girls and women believing that it is their duty to sleep with men ~ without receiving anything in return. I remember how shocked I was when I realized that I had every right, nay - even the power, to not have sex with a men. That this did not make me some kind of unhealthy freak in need of help.

How many girls and women know this right now?

And we're going to let our schools do even MORE damage?????

WAKE UP, PEOPLE!

Listen, folks, it really boils down to something very simple:

The Feminists don't care about women. What they care about is... well, let's put it this way:

The creators and past/present movers-and-shakers of the "Sexual Revolution" feel guilty. No matter how many times they've attemted to blame their guilt on Christianity or "persistant gender stereotyping" or the mores of society, THEY STILL FEEL GUILTY because... they know that they were so totally wrong. They know, right there in their hearts and souls, that passing oneself around from man to man is wrong. It hurts. It damages a woman ~ sometimes even beyond repair.

And they also know that the "Sexual Revolution" has dragged women down rather then raising them up. THEY HAVE FAILED US. As well as themselves...

But they can't admit that they are wrong or that they have failed women. Oh no! That would make them look bad. They can't admit that all of their disgusting sexual debauchery not only harmed each one of them, but has also nearly destroyed our society.

No. This is not an option.

So instead they must get to our kids. They must engineer it so that our kids end up just like them ~ just as sexually "liberated" (read: enslaved) AND MISERABLE as they were, and in present cases, still are. B ecause otherwise there is only one other option: to admit their guilt. And not just to us, but to themselves.

This is something that a mature, stable, healthy adult would be able to do. But we're not dealing with mature, stable, healthy adults. We are dealing with tortured, ruined women.

If a grown adult freely chooses to live a lifestyle that I disagree with, I don't waste much of my time worrying about their decisions. I pray for them to find true happiness in Christ but, as in all things, faith is a personal choice. It can't be forced onto another person.

But when grown adults force destructive, damaging lifestyles ONTO CHILDREN ... that's when I see red. And rightfully so.

The reason the UN (which caters to Feminists, of course) wants to teach 5 year olds about masterbation is because the Sexual Revolutionists are trying their best to tighten the noose around our children's necks so that there is no chance of escape.

Unless, of coures, your kids are homeschooled.

Observe the growing war on homeschooling ~ under the guise of "we must protect the children from being hidden away at home and abused."

That's rich! Coming from the same people that want to relentlessly sexually abuse children in our government schools.

Women, girls, I appeal to you with every fiber of my imperfect being: Consider your present lifestyle and honestly ask yourself: "Did I choose this? Or was I placed on this path as a child through such things as 'sex ed' and other indoctrinations? Am I doing what I want to do, or what has always been expected of me by our Feminist society?"

Please, don't be a slave any more. You are a free person filled with dignity and nobility. You are worth so much more then you could ever imagine.

My daughter(s) is going to learn how to live life to the fullest ~ not how to live life as the sex toy of multiple, uncaring guys that want nothing more then to use her body and toss her aside.