Archive for May, 2008
Wednesday, May 7th, 2008
The conflict for conservatives (who are not ready to just fall in line behind John McCain as the candidate they will support) continues with new developments.
McCain made two moves recently which inspire both positive and negative feelings. In other words, I’ve got good news and I’ve got bad news. Let’s start with the good.
John McCain recently chastised Barack Obama for voting against the nomination of Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts. McCain pledged once again to appoint judges in the mold of Justice Roberts and Alito. This is a great development for all people who are concerned with protecting the right to life.
“Senator Obama in particular likes to talk up his background as a lecturer on law, and also as someone who can work across the aisle to get things done,” McCain said. “But … he went right along with the partisan crowd, and was among the 22 senators to vote against this highly qualified nominee.”
In response, Obama’s campaign said McCain would pick judges who would threaten abortion rights as well as McCain’s own campaign finance reform bill.
“What’s truly elitist is to appoint judges who will protect the powerful and leave ordinary Americans to fend for themselves,” Obama spokesman Tommy Vietor said.
Ordinary Americans? You mean like the millions of unborn children who have had their lives forcefully taken from them under Roe v. Wade?
Barack Obama’s failure to support judges that uphold our constitution, and his radical leftwing views on abortion and other social issues should be enough to keep any person of faith from supporting his presidential candidacy.
I wish I could end this post with that bit of good news. Unfortunately, I have to share with you the bad news that comes with the good news. John McCain (the maverick) continues to irk conservatives when it comes to the issue of protecting our borders and enforcing the law when it comes to illegal immigration.
McCain has decided to speak at the far leftwing liberal La Razza convention which supports breaking the law and legitamizing illegal immigration. I applaud John McCain’s efforts to reach out to others who traditionally wouldn’t support a Republican candidate. However, many conservatives like myself are concerned that McCain is legitamizing La Razza and it’s efforts by speaking at their event.
This certainly wouldn’t be as big of a concern if McCain hadn’t been supporting a plan to give illegal immigrants amnesty just one year ago. Will we see another amnesty plan under a McCain administration? That remains to be seen.
One has to wonder if John McCain is so ardent in reaching out to the other side of the aisle politically because he’s concerned about conservative voters supporting him in November. The saga continues.
Posted in Uncategorized | 4 Comments »
Monday, May 5th, 2008
In Texas, the government has taken away some 400 children from their mothers because of the dangerous influence of a community which engages in polygamy. This dangerous behavior is said to have a negative affect on both young girls and young boys mental health, and I’d agree. There have also been allegations of some minors being sexually abused in this community, young women forced into relationships with older men, and this is appalling. If you listen closely to the media coverage, you’ll note that there is a huge emphasis being put on the negative influence of polygamy. I agree with the consensus that polygamy is not the best influence for children, but does this alone mean the government should interfere?
This sort of influence (polygamy) is viewed by many as unnatural and contrary to the traditional family values which this nation was founded upon. There aren’t many who disagree over polygamy and it’s affect on children. My question is, why is it that other forms of sexual deviance are accepted as tolerable environments for children to be raised in? Where is the outcry over children being brought up in homes where homosexual, bisexual, transsexual, and swinger (multiple partners) behavior occurs? These are also unnatural, and sexually deviant behaviors which many consider a dangerous environment to raise children in. Isn’t taking away children from just the polygamists a bit hypocritical? What about the hundreds of thousands of children who are in the care of other sexually deviant individuals?
In reality, I’m questioning whether any of these children should be removed from their parents unless these children are being physically abused (sexual or otherwise). The actions by the government, in taking away all 400 children from their mothers, is dangerous precedent. What happens if the government decides that fundamentalist Christians are brainwashing their children and leaving them mentally abused? What if the government doesn’t like how you raise your kids? Does that bother you? Maybe it should.
Should the government investigate abuse? Absolutely. Should they prosecute those adults who abuse? Yes, to the fullest extent of the law. Should the government seek to interfere in any family life because they feel they can raise kids better than parents? I don’t think so. In the end we are a country which is built on the belief that parents best know how to raise their biological offspring.
I’ll be the first person to step forward and say I’m appalled at what some parents allow their kids to be exposed to. In a perfect world kids wouldn’t be exposed to sexuality and gory violence on television, in the movies, on the Internet, and certainly not from their own biological parents who may practice polygamy, homosexuality, etc. Heck, in a perfect world kids would have a loving mother and father. Unfortunately the government simply cannot guarantee that to each and every child born in America. In fact the only time they can come close to guaranteeing that situation is when they play a role in the adoption process (where they should place kids into a normal traditional family with a loving mother and father).
Does that mean the government plays no role in parenting? No, I think they have an important job to do. They can help children by encouraging parental responsibility, doing things to help clean up our culture by promoting traditional values, and not burdening parents with out of control taxes.
Parental responsibility is personal responsibility and we need a whole lot more of that and a whole lot less of government trying to actually raise kids. Instead they should be trying to promote the best environment for parents to raise their kids. Just something to think about… What do you think?
Posted in Uncategorized | 1 Comment »
Sunday, May 4th, 2008
Over the weekend, after reading reliable reviews, I decided to go see the movie Iron Man. The film was visually impressive, and despite some questionable scenes it has a good message for a mature audience. So I was kind of surprised to see a lot of dads bring little kids with them. Several of these kids looked clearly under the age of 13. I wonder how many of the dads that decided to take their 6, 7, 8, or 9 year old kids took the time to read parental reviews and see what kind of content was going to be in this movie.
In case you’re wondering there were a few inappropriate scenes which were completely unnecessary. This is pretty typical for Hollywood these days. First, there was a comment by the main character about having slept with a number of calendar models, and later we see a scene where he’s rolling around in bed with a mostly naked reporter who he had just met earlier in the day. These may seem like harmless scenes, but they were unnecessary and what message does it send to kids? Now, to be fair, the character matures and comes to the realization that life isn’t all about how many women you can sleep with (treating them like objects) and it’s not about how much money you can make. I just wonder if that message gets through to a 6 year old kid who’s attention span is, well, limited to say the least.
Now, it’s the prerogative of parents to watch out for their kids and to decide what kind of movies their kids see. I just hope that parents take the time to think about these things before they subject young minds to mature content. I’m also extremely disappointed, but not surprised, by the movie companies which continue to inject mature material in movies aimed at kids. It’s pretty obvious they’re targeting kids when they advertise movie trailers during kids cartoons, market toys, and team up with fast food restaurants like Burger King to plaster movie images all over their kids meals.
Iron Man isn’t as offensive (and frankly outrageous) as last years Transformers movie was, but it still is not intended for children. That’s what the movie makers will say, that is precisely why it is rated PG-13, so why are they (the movie studios, the fast food chains, the television networks, and other corporations) targeting children ages 3 and up? Someone has to speak up about this. Will it be you?
Posted in Uncategorized | No Comments »
