In the case of Rep. Anthony Weiner’s wife, she is more than entitled to end the relationship based on his behavior, but she doesn’t need any advice from the peanut gallery.

The truth is that there are are some marriages where unfaithfulness is uncovered, it is dealt with, and counseled through, and the couple has a very happy and satisfying life. There are other marriages, where despite the aggrieved spouse’s efforts at reconciliation, the unfaithfulness continues or a new affair occurs. This was the case, of course with Governor Marc Sanford.

And then there are some affairs which shatter the trust in a marriage to such a degree that the offended spouse just can’t just the adulterer, and then it’s quite permissible to get a divorce.  There is no one answer that we are entitled to tell people that they ought to pursue. If the one-sized fits all, “Divorce the cheater” advice were applied universally, there are a lot of people who wouldn’t have found renewed happiness through reconciliation.

When couple committed to a process of restoration, it is worth pursuing, and would be Internet divorce gurus would do well not to disparage such efforts.

REUSEL, Netherlands, February 24, 2010 (LifeSiteNews.com) – The Dutch priest who refused Communion on February 13th to his town’s openly homosexual Carnival “prince” is now facing police complaints from homosexual activists.

The complaints follow a protest by homosexualists at the Catholic parish in Reusel on Sunday, which was held in response to the decision of the pastor, Fr. Luc Buyens, to withhold Communion from Gijs Vermeulen, 24, at the town’s traditional Carnival Mass.

Fr. Buyens had alerted Vermeulen in advance, stating that he must refuse him Communion because the young man had made a public display of his active homosexuality leading up to the town’s Carnival festivities.

Anticipating the protest, the priest decided, in consultation with his bishop in Den Bosch, not to distribute Communion at Mass this past Sunday, stating that he wanted to avoid “sins” and “sacrilege.”

Robert Cooijmans, a homosexual who attends the Roman Catholic parish in Cuijk, lodged his complaint against Fr. Buyens with the police yesterday.  He accuses Fr. Buyens of “discrimination,” claiming that his own pastor has never refused him the Eucharist.

Now, maybe, this gets dismissed, maybe it doesn’t, but it’s going to take a lot of time, energy, and effort for this priest to actually get out of this. Legal harassment and stress are going to take a toll. Just as a few years back, in Sweden a pastor spoke out against homosexuality and spent months going through the appeals process. and at the end, decided he would not speak out against homosexuality at all to avoid more legal trouble.

Of course in the United States, the use of police powers is limited, but still there are efforts. In the U.S., a Photographer who refused to work a gay committment ceremony was ordered to pay a $6,000 fine.

To be clear, I don’t think “the gays” in the sense of all homosexuals are in some grand cabal to deprive their fellow citizens of their basic rights to freedom of conscience. Many just want to live their lives and be left alone. I have no issue with them. Of course this paragraph will be completely ignored in the comments.

However, the professional radical agitators do have this in mind. They want to see a day where anyone who disagrees with homosexuality in any way is punished. They want them to lose their jobs, and be harassed by the police, as well as Orwellian named Human Rights Commissions which will serve to punish people for their religious views and refusal to participate and bless homosexuality.

To deny this agenda is to deny the facts and to deny the overall push of this movement in state after state, and nation after nation. The gay rights movement is not destructive because it pushes homsoexuality It is destructive because it seeks to destroy religious freedom and undermine the ability those who disagree with them to function in society. The long-term thrust of the movement is to transform America into a place where you have to live in fear if you disagree with them.

In Harrisburg, the capital city of Pennsylvania, crime has become such a problem that Stanley Lawson of the NAACP has asked Governor Ed Rendell to call in the National Guard to restore order.

During the month of June, twelve young people were gunned down. Many in broad daylight.

Mr. Lawson said: “We’re beyond what the Harrisburg police department can do. We need help.” Another NAACP member, Stanley Mitchell, in declaring the need to suspend some civil rights, added: “We have the civil right not to be shot.”

It’s easy to attack their willingness to demand martial law with a mandatory curfew, or to quote Benjamin Franklin’s warning that those who trade essential liberty for security will have neither liberty nor security. But that misses the point. The reaction of the Harrisburg NAACP is the same reaction that will come from anyone forced to live in a war zone.

Yet Mr. Johnson blames the actions of young gang warriors on fear. It would be more apt to say that the problem is fatherlessness.

The statistics are not pretty. Of teen runaways, 90 percent come from fatherless homes. So do 85 percent of all youth currently sitting in prison and 70 percent of long-term prison inmates. The negative statistics continue seemingly without end regarding the social (63 percent of youth suicides are from fatherless homes), economic (75 percent of children in single parent homes experience poverty), and educational (71 percent of high school dropouts are from single parent homes) impacts of homes without fathers — and how the problem has become pandemic among the African American community.

Read the rest here.

Thought on Christian parents, kids, and public schools.

Try GotoMyPC free for 30 days! For this special offer, visit www.gotomypc.com/podcast

Click here to download, click here to add this podcast to your Itunes

IMPORTANT: Please take our listener survey

Thought on Christian parents, kids, and public schools.

Try GotoMyPC free for 30 days! For this special offer, visit www.gotomypc.com/podcast

Click here to download, click here to add this podcast to your Itunes

IMPORTANT: Please take our listener survey

]]> http://www.adamsweb.us/blog/who-sends-a-6-year-old-to-war/feed/ 0 http://www.adamsweb.us/blog/the-sound-of-one-party-compromising/ http://www.adamsweb.us/blog/the-sound-of-one-party-compromising/#comments Tue, 16 Dec 2008 13:15:32 +0000 Adam Graham http://www.adamsweb.us/blog/the-sound-of-one-party-compromising/ Michelle McGinty sympathizes with Richard Cizik on Civil Unions, writing:

I guess this means I’m off the reservation because I think it’s reasonable to support civil unions as a compromise position especially given the fact that we live in a post-Christian, pluralistic country. The definition of marriage would be protected and the rights of gays would be protected as well. Good thing I’m not in a position of power, huh?

Yeah,  good thing.

There’s a number of issues I could take with this statement, because there’s a lot of problems I’ve got with Civil Unions. However, I just want to focus one thing. It’s the idea of “Civil Unions” as a compromise. A compromise genuinely happens when two party reach a “give and take” agreement. Here’s the problem: The radical homosexual groups who are attacking traditional marriage don’t accept the position. You go to a lot of the activist blogs and you’ll see banners like, “Seperate is not equal.” In Connecticutt, Civil Unions were passed by the State Legislature and really there wasn’t a whole lot of objection on the national right, but guess what came after Civil Unions? A lawsuit and then a court decision legalizing same sex marriage.

Certainly, there are homosexuals who would be happy with Civil Unions. Unfortunately, they don’t control all the organizations filing lawsuits. As long as you have lawyers to represent homosexual couples in suing to bring about same sex marriage, compromise is quite irrelevant. 90% of the homosexual community could want Civil Unions instead of marriage and it would mean nothing.

One-party compromises are what’s known as capitulation. It shows weakness and gets you exactly nowhere.

photo credit: newyorkblogPodcast Show Notes

On Obama’s “Lipstick on a Pig” gaffe coupled with a subtle question of whether Palin can handle the VP job with five kids.

Hope and Change, a new post-partisan politics trying to dig up dirt on Governor Palin. (Hat Tip: Michelle Malkin.)

More new tone, Obama’s honor suggesting that John McCain has no honor.

(Gap in Audio.)

What does it take to get dismissed from the Obama campaign? 

D0es Obama need to follow Olbermann’s advice and get angrier? (Hat Tip: Director Blue.)

Obama would consider holding off on increasing taxes on the rich to avoid hurting the economy.

Obama regrets “above my paygrade.”

Obama would have considered joining the military if only there were Vietcong to fight.

Obama’s gazebo to nowhere.

Washington Post gives credit where credit is due: Palin has moved Alaska’s Natural gas pipeline along. (Hat Tip: Hot Air.)

Obama claims Palin didn’t end bridge to nowhere, the Alaska Democratic Party website disagreed but then deleted the page before re-adding it. (Hat Tip: Instapundit.)

Another day, another manufactured scandal: Sarah Palin took per diems allowed by law, less than she was entitled to, and less than her predecessor.

Congressman Charlie Rangel (D-NY) urged to step down by House Republicans.

Liberals try and use lawsuit to shut down talk radio. (Hat Tip: Michelle Malkin.)

California marriage licenses dump husband and wife for Party A and Party B.

Click here to listen, click here to download.

Trackposted to Pet’s Garden Blog, Blog @ MoreWhat.com, third world county, The World According to Carl, The Pink Flamingo, Leaning Straight Up, Cao’s Blog, Gulf Coast Hurricane Tracker, Democrat=Socialist, and Right Voices, thanks to Linkfest Haven Deluxe

McCain flirts with the possibility of a pro-choice Vice-Presidential Candidate taking pro-life voters for granted and backtracking on a prior statement. 

A theological counterpart of Jeremiah Wright  will serve as CEO of the Democratic Convention. (Hat Tip: Dissecting Leftism.)

Obama snubs Charlie Rangel for a convention speaking spot. (Hat Tip: Hot Air.)

Obama teaches Democrats about hard work and supply demand by requring some people to volunteer in order to hold tickets to his acceptance speech. (Hat Tip: Michelle Malkin.) 

Another appearance of ethical impropriety by a Democratic Congressman.

Republican Senators desperately try to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory on oil drilling.

The Obama campaign attacks the author of a book attacking Obama, making me want to read the book.

Rick Warren’s nice guy church forum for the candidates.

The Netherlands says hello to imported polygamy.

Free speech triumphs at the University of Maryland.

Engish City prints wrong Birmingham on posters.

Click here to download, click here to add this podcast to your Itunes.

IMPORTANT:  Please take our listener survey

Try GotoMyPC free for 30 days! For this special offer, visit www.gotomypc.com/podcast.

Trackposted to Perri Nelson’s Website, Rosemary’s Thoughts, Allie is Wired, The Pink Flamingo, Dumb Ox Daily News, Democrat=Socialist, , Conservative Cat, and Right Voices, thanks to Linkfest Haven Deluxe.

Barack Obama wants government education beginning early-soon after birth. (Hat Tip: Education Watch.)

Obama has a plan to take us back to the 1970s with more than half the income of top earners going to the government, while with gas prices at record highs, the Democrat Congress contemplates a 10 cent gas tax hike.

Barack Obama has been too busy to do his job as Chairman of an important Senate Subcommittee.

In Kansas, George Tiller performs forced abortions illustrating the need for laws against abortion coercion while potential Obama running mate Governor Katheleen Sebelius shows herself such a Tiller Crony that she’s supporting a challenger to a long-time pro-life Democratic State Senator. (Hat Tip: Townhall.)

A liberal explains the art of winning the center to Republicans who are too clueless to get it.

Senator Jim Inhoffe (R-OK) brings forward energy reform legislation that will allow us easier use of natural gas.

A Catholic businessman boycotted by liberals for standing up for traditional marriage.

The World Court tries to intrude on American sovereignty in the execution of Mexican nationals convicted of murder in Texas despite the Supreme Court saying that the International Criminal Court has no jurisdiction over us.

A case of tax fraud that endangers religious liberty. (Hat Tip: Club for Growth.)

Shock poll: Hillary Clinton not as popular as Jacqueline Kennedy.

A British father branded a pervert for taking pictures of his own children.  (Hat Tip: World Magazine.)

A victory for women everywhere that will make every woman’s life better: Men at Work signs done away with in Atlanta. (Hat Tip: World Magazine.)

Want better education? Get rid of bad teachers. (Hat Tip: Right Mind.)

Boise Concealed Carry permit holders excercise their open carry right at the zoo.

Stories of Second Amendment rights excercised in the defense of lives and property.

Republicans need to get active online because the Internet’s not going away.

Music by Jessica Vasquez via the Podsafe Music Network.

Click here to listen,  click here to download. 

Trackposted to Perri Nelson’s Website, Rosemary’s Thoughts, third world county, Woman Honor Thyself, Right Truth, The World According to Carl, Shadowscope, Pirate’s Cove, The Pink Flamingo, Cao’s Blog, The Amboy Times, Gulf Coast Hurricane Tracker, Dumb Ox Daily News, Democrat=Socialist, and CORSARI D’ITALIA, thanks to Linkfest Haven Deluxe.

Why Obama’s decision to leave his church smacks of politics.

Why Hillary supporters are wrong to make a stink about the DNC decision to admit half of Florida and Michigan’s delegates.

Is big ears the only thing keeping Barack Obama off Mount Rushmore?

Plus Barack Obama’s dangerous plans for national security. (Hat Tip: Obama Watch.) Plus Obama’s new states.

Is Tom Coburn off his nut when he suggests John McCain can lead us back to true conservatism. (Hat Tip: Hot Air.)

Plus a new rallying cry for conservatives wary of McCain: “No More Susan Sarandon” (Hat Tip: Reformed Chicks Babbling.)

Congressman Paul Ryan proposes bold reform (Hat Tip: Save the GOP.)

Bob Dole nails Scott McClellan. (Hat Tip: Wizbang.)

Reuters sues New York State over New York’s over-reaching.

Organ donations go to foreign mobsters over U.S. citizens. (Hat Tip: Michelle Malkin.)

The California Assembly takes a step towards Euthanasia. (Hat Tip: Right Mind.)

Child pornography by any other name.

Virginia takes steps to protect children from teacher predators after an AP investigation.

Bureaucratic rules mean that a student with the highest GPA won’t be her class valedictorian and will cost her a college scholarship.

A 10 year old was suspended and faces potential probation for bringing a Memorial Day souvenir to school.

Clint Eastwood and Spike Lee face off over Iwo Jima.

Are 70% of Americans wrong when they say divorce is all right? (Hat Tip: Evangelical Outpost.)

Why are so many liberals against transracial adoption but for homosexual adoption? (Hat Tip: Michelle Malkin.)

Watch out ladies in Colorado, new legislation makes locker rooms and restrooms gender free.

Rowan Williams futilely appeals to the UN. to intervene in Zimbabwe.

An apology to the class of 2008.

A Sandpoint employer takes care of his employees.

Click here to listen.

Bonus Podcast:

Subway apologizes for their slight of homeschoolers.

Anti-male bias in domestic violence shelters. (Hat Tip: Political Correctness Watch.)

Taking risks for God in China.

A U.S. soldier in trouble for sharing the gospel in Iraq. (Hat Tip: Stop the ACLU.)

What a restored house tells us about how to address the environment and the future of our nation. (Hat Tip: Crunchy Con.)

Click here to download, click here to add this podcast to your Itunes.

Music by David Spak, courtesy of Podsafe Music.

Trackposted to Outside the Beltway, Rosemary’s Thoughts, 123beta, Right Truth, Leaning Straight Up, The Amboy Times, Cao’s Blog, Democrat=Socialist, Adeline and Hazel, Faultline USA, third world county, The World According to Carl, Pirate’s Cove, Blue Star Chronicles, The Pink Flamingo, Gulf Coast Hurricane Tracker, Wolf Pangloss, Right Voices, and The Yankee Sailor, thanks to Linkfest Haven Deluxe.

Nationally, as a result of this case, there will undoubtedly be renewed calls for a federal constitutional amendment outlawing same-sex marriage. Conservatives should resist the temptation to support such a remedy. States must solve this problem for themselves. They cannot and should not be saved from themselves or absolved of the responsibility that they have, a responsibility protected against federal intrusion by the Tenth Amendment.

In the first place, playing the game of judicial activists, and leaping to the federal-constitutional-amendment remedy every time judges misread the constitution and change the law, is a fool’s errand. Passing two-thirds of both houses of Congress and three-quarters of the state legislatures has proven to be an impossible hurdle for the marriage amendment and many other proposed constitutional amendments, even when Republicans controlled Congress.

Thompson gets it right on the practicality. Wrong on principle. A marriage amendment is hard to pass, that’s true. However, what those proposing a marriage amendment are suggesting is not on the scale of judicial activism, because what’s being proposed is not riding roughshod over existing processes for changing the Constitution, but following them. While you may not agree with the FMA tact, to equate it with judicial activism is to equate legitimate actions to amend the constitution with illegitimate actions to undermine it.

More fundamentally, the issue presented is not whether conservatives will get their way on the issue of same-sex marriage. The issue is, in our system of government, determining the appropriate place for this issue to be decided. For over 200 years marriage and related issues have been the province of state, not federal law.

Here again is the problem with Fred Thomspon on the social issues of our time. It was the weakness Alan Keyes pointed to quite rightly in his Reno speech when he compared Thompson’s position on abortion to that of Stephen Douglas on slavery. Douglas famously declared that he cared not whether slavery was legal or illegal, as long as states decided it. Thompson’s position here is that he cares not whether gay marriage is legal or illegal as long as the states decide it.

According to Thompson, as long as its the state legislature that takes a sledgehammer to the foundation of Western Civilization, it’s okay.

Now, I know many folks who are pro-life and pro-family who feel these issues should be decided at the state level. But Thompson doesn’t come off as against gay marriage, but indifferent to it in his federalism. This is part of what gave Thompson problems with religious conservatives in 2008 and should be a lesson to federalists. If Religious Conservatives feel you’re indifferent to their causes, you will not gain their support.

The California Supreme Court in an outrageous show of judicial activism, legalizes gay marriage in California. (Hat Tip: Right Mind.)

John McCain goes sci-fi, and speaks of his first four years as President in the past tense while clueless House Republicans turn to him as their only hope. They have a bold new agenda to use government to fix our lives with a slogan borrowed from an anti-depressant. The base is getting right: throw the bums out.

Obama gets upset when Bush comes out against appeasement. (Hat Tip: Jules Crittenden.)

Plus some political hope with America’s newest young mayor.

Click here to download, click here to add this podcast to your Itunes.

Try GotoMyPC free for 30 days! For this special offer, visit www.gotomypc.com/podcast.

Trackposted to Diary of the Mad Pigeon, Rosemary’s Thoughts, Faultline USA, Woman Honor Thyself, Right Truth, The World According to Carl, The Pink Flamingo, Oblogatory Anecdotes, Cao’s Blog, , Democrat=Socialist, Conservative Cat, and The Yankee Sailor, thanks to Linkfest Haven Deluxe.

 Operation Blessing gets ready to send relief into Myanmar.

 Hillary Clinton touts White Support.

Barack Obama plans to declare victory on May 20th.  

One Super Delegate’s demand: $20 million for registering Mexican-American voters.

McCain pushes McAmnesty.  (Hat Tip: Right Wing News.)

Bob Barr prepares to announce for the presidency.  

Wal-mart: Friend of the poor.  

When should Liberal Republicans be challenged.  (Hat Tip: Michelle Malkin.)

Public school supported transgenderism. (Hat Tip: Stop the ACLU.) 

Click here to download,  click here to add this podcast to your Itunes. 

 Try GotoMyPC free for 30 days! For this special offer, visit www.gotomypc.com/podcast.  

Trackposted to Diary of the Mad Pigeon, Rosemary’s Thoughts, Right Truth, Kodera’s Korner, The World According to Carl, Blue Star Chronicles, The Pink Flamingo, Leaning Straight Up, Cao’s Blog, Democrat=Socialist, CORSARI D’ITALIA, Dumb Ox Daily News, Conservative Cat, Right Voices, and The Yankee Sailor, thanks to Linkfest Haven Deluxe.

The 40-year-old actor and his 22-year-old wife, Shannon Price, are set to appear on TV’s “Divorce Court” on May 1 and 2. The couple wed in August after meeting on the set of the 2006 comedy “Church Ball.”

Among the problems the pair discusses with Judge Lynn Toler are Coleman’s anger and intimacy issues. Coleman and Price agree they have “ugly” monthly fights.

“If he doesn’t get his way, he throws a temper tantrum like a five-year-old does,” Price says, according to a transcript of the show obtained by The Associated Press. “He like stomps the floor and yells, ‘Meehhhh,’ and starts throwing stuff around. He bashes his head in the wall, too.”

Coleman says he gets frustrated because “the male is always the bad guy.”

“When I try to state my case or explain things to her or try to get her to understand my point of view,” Coleman says, “my point of view doesn’t matter.”

Price also complains that Coleman has no friends and inexplicably disappears from home in the middle of the night. When Toler presses him, Coleman admits he is negative.

“I don’t have any friends and don’t have any intention of making any,” he says. “People will stab you in the back, mistreat you, talk about me behind your back, steal from you. And they’re not really your friends. (They’re) only there because you’re a celebrity or because they want to get something from you.”

This is a very sad case. It sounds like Coleman and wife have issues, but who doesn’t? Reading the story, it honestly seems that the issues are best worked out by a marriage counselor rather than before a tabloid TV judge. 

It raises interesting questions about emotional maturity and understanding of committment in both parties to say the least. The old wedding vows say that marriage “is not to be entered into unadvisedly or lightly; but reverently, discreetly, advisedly, soberly, and in the fear of God.”

That type of thing is perhaps too old fashion, but is vitally necessary.

The Constitution Party’s amazingly stupid nominating decision.

John McCain ticking off the base is costing him money.

In Alabama, McCain gets a sweetheart deal on rent. (Hat Tip: Pam’s House Blend.)

John McCain riding on his wife’s corporate jet (a new non-scandal.)

Barack Obama’s Socialist/Communist blogger.  

Hillary and religion.

Plus: A future Clinton victimhood claim?

Plus Nancy Pelosi makes her own Bible verse.

The ACLU declares war on border enforcement.

A drug smuggler brings more illegal drugs into the country thanks to the decision to grant him immunity to help prosecute border patrol agents. (Hat Tip: Wizbang.)

Britons marvel at the peacefulness of America despite our guns or perhaps because of them. (Hat Tip: Clayton Cramer.)

School threatens teenagers for wearing a pro-life t-shirt. (Hat Tip: Jill Stanek.)

A student takes a step towards a life of pro-life activism.

Women tell tales of the horrors experienced at Dr. George Tiller’s abortion clinic while Democratic Governor Kathleen Sebelus refuses to protect them, but Missouri Governor Matt Blunt (R-MO) signs a similar bill.

Justice Scalia schools 60 minutes on Constiutional Interpretation regarding abortion.

Archbishops disobey the Pope to give communion to pro-abortion politicians.

Women unaware of available pregnancy resources on college campuses.

The U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals rules for free speech.

Government employees misuse credit cards in order to fund luxuries off the backs of taxpayers.

Unions hold up the Columbia Free Trade Agreement in order force Congress to make it easier for unions to intimidate people into joinining and starting unions. Why would they push that? For one thing, being a Union Boss is big money.

A principal in Sparks, Nevada forbids students from gathering in groups of more than 3 unless they’re evolved in an officially organized activity.

Australian Mayor considers a parent letting their 12 year old daughter have sex, a sign of “maturity.”

Amid allegations of child abuse out of a Texas Polygamist Ranch, CNN asks, “What’s the deal with those outfits?”

A Wisconsin Police Officer abuses his authority.

A story from the dumb criminals file.

Sister Toldjah finds a worthy nominee for jerk of the year: an anti-war protester who assaulted a girl in a wheelchair.

New Children’s book helps kids deal with Mommy’s plastic surgery.  (Hat Tip: Crunchy Cons.)

PETA seeks lab grown meat.

Why sending girls outside could help increase their focus and mitigate ADHD.

Click here to download, click here to add this podcast to your Itunes.

 Try GotoMyPC free for 30 days! For this special offer, visit www.gotomypc.com/podcast

Trackposted to Outside the Beltway, The Virtuous Republic, Rosemary’s Thoughts, 123beta, Maggie’s Notebook, Cao’s Blog, Conservative Cat, D equals S, Nuke Gingrich, third world county, Woman Honor Thyself, The World According to Carl, Pirate’s Cove, The Pink Flamingo, Gulf Coast Hurricane Tracker, , Stageleft, Right Voices, The Yankee Sailor, and Eric’s Writing Corner, thanks to Linkfest Haven Deluxe.

Obama friend and retired domestic terrorist Bill Ayers has a blog and he hasn’t matured a whole lot since the 1960s. John McCain goes after Obama on the whole situation, at last showing some fight.

On the bright side for Obama, he brought on two very competent supporters. However, apparently his fear of another battle with Mrs. Clinton led to next week’s debate being cancelled. (Hat Tip: Flopping Aces.)

Meanwhile, McCain’s duplicitous repudation of John Hagee. Former Senator Bob Kerrey (D-NE) defends McCain on the temper issue.

Continuing fallout over the abortion/art scandal at Yale.

The danger of sex changes for children. (Hat Tip: Where is Jodi?)

Governor Charlie Crist (R-FL) proposes relief for Florida drivers. (Hat Tip: Government Bytes.)

Click here to download, click here to add this podcast to your Itunes.

Try GotoMyPC free for 30 days! For this special offer, visit www.gotomypc.com/podcast

Trackposted to Rosemary’s Thoughts, third world county, DragonLady’s World, Maggie’s Notebook, Right Truth, Pirate’s Cove, The Pink Flamingo, Big Dog’s Weblog, Cao’s Blog, Conservative Cat, Right Voices, D equals S, and Gone Hollywood, thanks to Linkfest Haven Deluxe.

We’re joined for Hatton Humphrey of the East Coast Conservative for most of the show.

It’s tax time and we talk about the Presidential Candidates Taxes a little bit.

Barack uses Dave Matthews band tickets to get people away from a Bill Clinton speech. Ah, bribing people with Concert tickets. It’s the new politics. (Hat Tip: Director Blue.)

Jeremiah Wright v. Black Evangelicals.

Another day, another whopper for Hillary Clinton. (Hat Tip: Hot Air.)

John McCain invents new classes of voters to go after.

Blogger right need more protection.

Bush Administration cuts red tape to finish the border fence.

Liberal talk radio guy caught in sex scandal. (Hat Tip: Hot Air.)

Washington State becomes the eighth state with earmarks transparency.

The Pig Book is out chronicling pork and waste in the federal government.

Florida’s House Speaker fights for taxpayer’s rights. (Hat Tip: Government Bytes.)

House Bill proposes big spending for population control groups.

Ted Turner makes a flawed case for population control based on Soylent Green.

China accuses the Dalai Lama of terrorism while they crack down on Buddhist monks.

An Ohio State representative wants to force parents to “volunteer” at school.

Neo-Darwinists show unprofessionalism as they try to crash Expelled and disrupt its conference calls. Also Academic freedom legislation that would allow teachers to discuss scientific objections to neo-Darwinianism is under attack with sometimes misleading information.

A teacher makes a fallacious anti-Christian statement and claims he was trying to teach his students how to thing.  (Hat Tip: Patterico.)

Student leave school at taxpayer expense for a gun control rally in Chicago. (Hat Tip: Publius Forum.)

Blaming the Internet for plagarism.

The problem with barring websites from requring people to list their sexual orientation.

A Muslim Speeders gets an exception to keep his driver’s license.

A reminder from Australia: Abortion is great for sex offenders.

Preparing High School kids “in the gap” for college from a biblical worldview.

North Korean and Algerian Christians persecuted for their faith.

 Music by Catz in the Hatz courtesy of the Podsafe Music Network.

 Click here to download, click here to add this podcast to your Itunes.

Try GotoMyPC free for 30 days!  For this special offer, visit www.gotomypc.com/podcast

Trackposted to Outside the Beltway, 123beta, Maggie’s Notebook, Right Truth, Shadowscope, Leaning Straight Up, Cao’s Blog, Conservative Cat, Pursuing Holiness, D equals S, Chuck’s Place, Pirate’s Cove, Oblogatory Anecdotes – Photoshop Montage/Open Trackbacks, The Pink Flamingo, Wolf Pangloss, A Newt One- Don’t miss this show!, Dumb Ox Daily News, Rant it Up, Tilting At Windmill Farms, and Right Voices, thanks to Linkfest Haven Deluxe.

You know, I just don’t see that families are in decline. Maybe the percent of nuclear families is lower, but that doesn’t mean there are fewer families. Being part of a blended family, I think my family is just fine. My kids don’t seem to be headed for prison.

A few things here. First of all, the way I used decline is the same way one would speak of a decline of civilization. The semantical argument in that case would go like this:

Adam: We’re seeing the decline of civilization.

Alan: Are you kidding me? We still have a civilization.

The traditional marriage based two parent family is what works, sorry.

Second, Alan’s use of anecdotal evidence (i.e. I don’t think my kids are going to prison.) is an Uncle Bernie argument. An Uncle Bernie argument goes, “You know my Uncle Bernie smoked to the day he died at age 80 when he was hit by a truck.” Uncle Bernie may not have got lung cancer, but that doesn’t mean smoking is safe, in fact it increases your chance of getting cancer.  There are facts about the presence of a fathers in the lives of their children:

Children in homes without the fathers present were at an increased risk for transmission of psychological disorders. Children who had lost their fathers were nearly twice as likely as those from intact families to manifest symptoms of psychological disorder (ratio 1.81; p<.03). Children who had experienced more than 12 months of lone-mother upbringing were twice as likely to exhibit psychological disorders as children who did not spend more than 12 months in a mother-only home (odds ratio 1.83; p<.03). Children who had experienced more than 12 months of stepfather upbringing were also nearly twice as likely as children in intact homes to exhibit symptoms of disorder (odds ratio 1.93; p<.04)

Even after controlling for family background variables such as mother’s education level, race, family income, and number of siblings, as well as neighborhood variables such as unemployment rates and median income, boys who grew up outside of intact marriages were, on average, more than twice as likely as other boys to end up in jail.

So despite Alan’s Uncle Bernie anecdote, the decline of the traditional family does have an impact. Just because a kid’s from an intact family, that doesn’t mean he can’t end up in prison, and just because he comes from a single parent home or a broken home doesn’t mean he can’t end up living a wonderful life. However, the odds are against both examples. 

A bigger reason for bulging prisons might be criminalizing drugs instead of providing treatment for users. But, conservative are usually into accountability (except when it comes to the Bush administration). So spend tax $$ to punish, rather than to help.

I actually have no difficulty with rehab for first time users as opposed to prison, but I think if you’re going to have to argue drugs as a concern, you have to look at why kids use drugs:

Even after controlling for the effects of gender, age, race-ethnicity, family income, and residential mobility, teens in single-parent and stepparent families were 2 times more likely to use illegal drugs compared to teens in intact, two-parent married families.

Alan then writes:

And BTW, I don’t think the rate of “fatherlessness” is changing at all. So far, everyone still has to have a father. Perhaps there are fewer fathers in nuclear families, and thus not living with the kids. That doesn’t make the kids fatherless.

Let’s take a look at the dictionary definition of fatherless:

1. not having a living father: a fatherless boy.
2. not having a known or legally responsible father.

To see a boy doesn’t know his father is not fatherless is just wrong and it’s a semantical game.

Alan: It’d be easy enough to show that large numbers of folks in prisons are from non-nuclear families, but there are many other stats that explain it even more closely. How about socio-economic status? If we had no poor people, we’d have way fewer folks locked up.

And again, we go back to Single Parent homes and the lack of a father:

Single-parent families are five times as likely to be poor as married-couple families. In 1999, 6.3 percent of married-couple families with children were living in poverty, compared to 31.8 percent of single-parent families with children.

It all comes back to the decline of the traditional two parent family.  Drugs, Poverty, Crime. The left will never acknowledge it because it’s the antithesis of modern feminism.

Modern feminism believes that a single mother (x) raising a child is as good as a father (y) and mother (x) raising a child in terms of the Child’s health, well-being, and general welfare. The formula mathamatically could be said to be:

x+y=x

The problem with such a statement is that if x+y=x, than y=zero, meaning ultimately that fathers are quite literally worthless in the lives of their children. Chris at Unequivocal Notion expresses it succinctly:

No, it is a direct correlation between stupid people raising stupid kids — two stupid parents are not necessarily better than one. 

Thus, if you’re children ended up in prison and you’re a single parent, it wasn’t because you were overtaxed beyond what 1 person could possibly be expected to do, it’s just because you were and single moms, having a dad around would make things even worse, because Dad is not a Zero, he’s a -1.

To see men arguing so strongly for their own irrelevancy is bizarre and indeed, a little sad.

UPDATE:

For clarification, I was not talking about all liberals. I was reminded that there are common sense liberals that don’t believe in the irrelevancy of men, marriage, family, etc. However, the ideology of the Idaho leftosphere definitely leans that way.

My thoughts on the South Carolina GOP debate. Thompson the big winner, Huckabee, McCain further back. Much further.

Also, corrupt Congressman John Doolittle (R-CA) retires, and no Politico, he’s not a victim.

A funny thing about a woman suing against voter identification at the polls, she’s registered to vote in two states, thus proving the need for the law. (Hat Tip: Hot Air.)

Homeschoolers fleeing Germany.

Click here to download, click here to add this podcast to your Itunes.

Trackposted to Diary of the Mad Pigeon, Rosemary’s Thoughts, Blue Star Chronicles, Pirate’s Cove, The Pink Flamingo, Big Dog’s Weblog, Right Voices, Adeline and Hazel, and The Yankee Sailor, thanks to Linkfest Haven Deluxe.

A bill in Massachusetts to ban spanking threatens parental rights.

Click here to download, click here to add this podcast to your Itunes.

Try GotoMyPC free for 30 days! For this special offer, visit www.gotomypc.com/podcast

I’ll remind you again that my argument was not an attempt to make a judgment, good or bad, about marriage. My argument was that domestic violence is not bound by marital status. The data is there and it does not show what Thayn and others have tried to claim: that domestic violence is caused by what they call a breakdown in the traditional family structure. You have to admit that a 44.5% incidence among married couples is troubling whether or not you agree with my methodology in calculating the population percentage. The data show that domestic violence occurs in all segments of society with gender and age being more significant determining factors than marital status. This fallacious argument that encouraging marriage and discouraging divorce is somehow going to convince an abuser to stop is dangerous.

What’s actually fallacious is the understanding of the debate. If what Steve Thayn were saying was, “If we restore traditional family values, we’ll have no domestic violence,” then MGR would have a point. But Thayn himself admitted that families have never been perfect.

So let’s redefine the discussion here. The best of values, the best of principles will not obliterate domestic violence completely from our culture. Like any other crime, it has continued throughout human history and will be with us until Christ comes. That’s not the point.

My view of the situation is that our family problems are not unlike a medical condition. There are certain risk factors involved in medical situations. Smoking puts you at risk for lung cancer, so if you want to reduce lung cancer, you try and get people to stop smoking. If you want to reduce heart attacks, you get people to eat better, stop smoking, etc. Of course, you’ll still have heart attacks and cancer, but you’ll have less of them.

That age and gender are prime corollary measures of domestic violence shouldn’t surprise us. You could probably go back 200 years and find the same issues in domestic violence. There’s little people can do about either of those issues. What we have to look at is not just who suffers, but why. For that we look evidence, studies, etc.

The question ultimately comes down to an issue of why does domestic violence occur? Usually, it’s a result of something on the inside of the abuser, something wrong with them on a psychological level. What can cause that?:

Children in homes without the fathers present were at an increased risk for transmission of psychological disorders. Children who had lost their fathers were nearly twice as likely as those from intact families to manifest symptoms of psychological disorder (ratio 1.81; p<.03). Children who had experienced more than 12 months of lone-mother upbringing were twice as likely to exhibit psychological disorders as children who did not spend more than 12 months in a mother-only home (odds ratio 1.83; p<.03). Children who had experienced more than 12 months of stepfather upbringing were also nearly twice as likely as children in intact homes to exhibit symptoms of disorder (odds ratio 1.93; p<.04)

Compared to men who were convicted of non-violent crimes, men in this sample who were convicted of spouse abuse displayed more signs of aggression, more problems with control of movement or thinking, and more symptoms of Borderline and Antisocial Personality Disorder.

We might draw some conclusions. If we want a long-term reduction in domestic violence, then we better have a long-term focus on having well-adjusted children. And if we want well-adjusted children, maybe fatherlessness is not equal to marriage as a lifestyle for kids, particularly if we want to avoid domestic violence in the next generation.

Of course, we might look at Domestic Violence and say, “You know, if people didn’t get upset so much, that might solve the problem.” And we might ask, “What’s tied to folks getting upset?”

Husbands in couples with a history of multiple cohabitations exhibited more verbal aggression than husbands with no prior cohabitation. Husbands in couples with multiple cohabitation experiences also expressed more verbal aggression than their wives. Further, wives in couples who lived with their spouse prior to marriage expressed more verbal aggression than wives in couples with no prior cohabitation.

So maybe this cohabitation thing’s not a great idea. Of course, I’ve been accused of wanting a woman whose cohabitating (funny how nobody ever worries about men getting abused) to marry her abuser. That’s not true. What I think we need to do as a society is to be honest that the practice is unwise and not something that should be done, rather than pretending it’s “all right.” It’s not “all right”, it’s incredibly unwise and the relationships of those who practice it are more likely to end in abuse, and eventual divorce when marrying:

The longer couples cohabited before marrying, the more likely they were to resort to heated arguments, hitting, and throwing objects when conflicts arose in their subsequent marriage. A longer length of cohabitation was linked to a greater frequency of heated arguments, even when controlling for spouses’ age.

Compared to married couples who did not cohabit before marriage, couples who cohabited before marriage were 65 percent more likely to separate and only one-third as likely to reconcile following a separation.

These are well-established, well-document facts. Part of the issue is that we do need to change our overall societal view of marriage. Part of the problem in many marriages is that a secularist/pop-psychology mentality has poisoned the well. Plus many people don’t enter adulthood knowing what marriage will entail or what to look for in a spouse:

Wives of husbands who express familistic beliefs, including belief in the value of marriage and childbearing, belief in the importance of adult children caring for elderly parents, greater concern about divorce that involves couples with children and gender-role traditionalism are significantly more likely to feel appreciated for their household labor than wives of men who only express gender-role traditionalism without familistic beliefs.

In addition, perhaps one of the best things to do is something the state can’t do at all: send Protestant missionaries door-to-door converting men as quick as they can and get them active in the Church:

Active conservative Protestant husbands are significantly less likely than mainline Protestant or unaffiliated fathers to commit domestic violence, while their less religiously active counterparts are the most likely among these groups to commit domestic violence.

Now, you will always find exceptions to these rules, because we’re only dealing with risk factors and there may be something else going on, or a person’s personality may make things different. Thus, you will find some kids being abused in active Protestant homes, which is a shame. You’ll also find some kids who grow up relatively fine with a single mother.

However, when deciding what to encourage and what to discourage, you don’t look at anecdotal evidence. Otherwise, we should encourage smoking because a guy had an Uncle Jack who smoked until he was 90 and was healthy as a horse. You look at studies. What actually works well overall? That’s what you encourage. What generally gets messed up and leads to social problems, delinquency, etc? That’s what you want to discourage, and suggest is not an ideal situation.

Now, as to the issue of no-fault divorce itself, what MGR and the rest of the people crowing about this issue totally ignore that there are feminists who oppose No Fault Divorce. Marcia Pappas, President of the National Organization for Women in New York State spells out the reason for her opposition:

The National Organization for Women, New York State, Inc. strongly opposes no-fault divorce legislation that has been introduced in our Legislature. Opposition to unilateral no-fault divorce has been our long-standing position with strong support from the entire NOW body. We are an organization of advocates for equality for women. The majority of calls received by our chapters are from women in the midst of severe matrimonial problems.
The New York State Bar Association has stated that New York needs no-fault because New York is the only state without unilateral no-fault grounds. This is not a good enough reason, as we will explain. New York State is also the only state requiring child support until age 21. This is a shining example of protecting our children better than any other state.

The following is taken from the opposition memorandum of The Domestic Violence Task Force of the Bar Association of the City of New York: “We find the argument included in the memorandum of support of the proposed bill that no-fault should be adopted because otherwise a spouse who lacks economic resources may be forced to remain in a marriage that is not working for them to be entirely unpersuasive and not representative of our clients lives.

There are myriad reasons why spouses choose to stay in a marriage or to divorce. This is true for battered women as well as women who have never been battered. No-fault divorce takes away their options, it allows the spouse with no grounds, batterer or not, to obtain a divorce over the objections of the less powerful spouse without negotiating a divorce settlement.

Eliminating the requirement to reach a settlement will send more cases into court, thereby increasing rather than decreasing court backlog. This failure to negotiate drives the issues of child custody, child and spousal support, and property division into court where women continue to face gender bias, a fact that even the Office of Court Administration acknowledges.

Proponents of the bill argue that there is no need to “air the dirty laundry” in court. But advocates in the women’s movement know the importance of allowing the judges to hear the facts, behaviors and circumstances that led to the break-up of the marriage.

There is much need for change to the current Domestic Relations Law before we send the weaker party and the children afloat on the sea of no-fault induced poverty, as was the case in California, the first state to introduce no-fault divorce.

In addition, as reported in the Domestic Violence Task Force report previously referred to: “experience from other states shows that where grounds are unnecessary, domestic abuse [and other grounds] may be treated as tangential and therefore irrelevant to the allocation of marital resources. This has been precisely the result in some states that have adopted no-fault divorce grounds. For example, in Oregon, which has a no-fault divorce statutory structure, the Court of Appeals denied a wife’s claim for maintenance based on severe domestic violence in In re Koch, 648 P.2d406 (Or. Ct. App.1982). The court held that under Oregon’s law fault could not be considered a factor in dividing the parties’ marital property or in awarding spousal support. Physical abuse afflicted on the wife, could only be considered insofar as it rendered her unable to work, or in her possible increased need for financial support. Similarly, the Illinois court, in In re Marriage of Cihak, 92 Ill. App. 3d 1123 (Ill. App Ct. 1981) held that the [attempted] murder of the wife by the husband could not be considered and would have no effect whatsoever on the division of the parties’ marital property or any spousal support award because under “true” no fault divorce law a reward can only be based upon the financial needs of parties, regardless of fault.

In contrast, New York’s current fault provisions provide a basis for the introduction of evidence concerning domestic violence and its impact on the financial settlement of the divorce. For example, Justice Silbermann in Havel v.Islam, 273, A.D., 2d 164 (1st Dept. 2002), found that the husbands’ assault on his wife with a barbell was a critical factor in determining the allocation of marital resources. This hard won victory should not be undermined by enacting no-fault legislation that does not specifically address the role of fault in dividing marital property.”

Perhaps, the head of NOW, in one of the most liberal states in the nation, is far too conservative. Or perhaps MGR and the Idaho left need to take a step back and examine this issue with more of an open mind, rather than trying to score partisan points.

However, this latest story demands a response:

Security was tight today as Westboro Baptist Church member Shirley Phelps-Roper appeared in Sarpy County Court to answer charges that she mutilated a flag and put her child in danger while protesting at the funeral of a Bellevue, Neb., soldier.

Although the Sarpy County Sheriff’s Office prepared for a possible protest by members of Topeka-based Westboro Baptist Church, none materialized. A few family members and her attorney accompanied Phelps-Roper, 50.

According to Bellevue police, Phelps-Roper had her 10-year-old son stomp on an American flag. Church members had obtained a city of Bellevue permit to protest.

The church, founded by her father, Fred Phelps, has protested across the country at the funerals of numerous soldiers, alleging that their deaths were God’s retribution for America’s toleration of homosexuality.

The pretrial hearing centered on a defense motion requesting that the prosecution describe in detail the specific facts that support the charges, which include disturbing the peace, contributing to the delinquency of a minor, and negligent child abuse.

Her attorney, Bassel El-Kasaby, argued that without specifics on what actions broke the law in each case and who was victimized he can’t prepare his case.

“I don’t think you can disturb the peace of a police officer or firefighter,” he said.

He said it was “unorthodox” and potential “overreaching” by prosecutors to charge Phelps-Roper with contributing to the delinquency of a minor and negligent child abuse.

“I’d like to know who the victim is and what harm they suffered,” he said.

He said if the flag mutilation charge is found unconstitutional, the other charges likewise may be dismissed, but he needs to know the relationship between the charges.

Deputy Sarpy County Attorney Marc Delman resisted El-Kasaby’s request, saying he didn’t want to limit the basis for the charges.

Our friends at Stop the ACLU are celebrating. For once, I must dissent. What we’ve got here, regardless of the Unchristian nature of the Phelps’, is a Country Attorney that won’t even explain the exact reasons of the charge.

Plus, whether we like it or not, mutilating the flag (as repugnant as it is) is considered protected speech, so it’d be very tough to make that the basis of a prosecution for child abuse if that’s considered protected speech.

Stop the ACLU links a video that shows how the Phelps children have been abused: through brainwashing. As heartbreaking as the footage of the Phelps’ children is, more startling to me is the commentary that is provided in subtitles:

“Instead of being taught to think for herself and perceive the world in her own way and make her own decisions, she is being taught to think in a very particular way and learn a doctrine which she will never be asked her own opinion of. By the time she reaches her early teens, she will be incapable of logical thinking and making her own mind up about things.”

Then the film cuts to a film of a Jesus movie, where Jesus says, “Out of the mouth of babes, you have perfected praise.” And the author of the video translates, “In other words, don’t tell children what to think, say, or believe. They have their own minds which God gave them.”

That sentence taken to its logical conclusion would mean that children couldn’t be taught any beliefs: In God or in the doctrines of any church. They couldn’t be taught about any political or moral ideals. They couldn’t be told it was wrong to use the “n-word” (you can’t tell children what to say.)

At the end of the day, you’re left with a philosophy that itself tends to abuse, which utterly destroys freedom if left unchecked. The big question would be, “What religious or political beliefs can’t a parent teach their children?”

The Phelps clan doctrine would surely be banned and so would racists. What about the fundamental Christian belief that Jesus is the Way, the Truth, and the Life, and no one comes to the Father, except by him? Would Sunday Schools and Youth Groups that taught the Bible and encouraged evangelism be considered abusive brainwashing centers? Would parents who took their children to the Life Chain be considered on par with Shirley Phelps-Roper having her son burn the American flag?

On the other side, would taking your children to anti-war or gay rights rallies be considered unpermissable indoctrination or child abuse? What about parents who teach their kids that 9/11 was an inside job and that our President is an accessory to homicide? Are they fit parents?

These are the type of questions a free people doesn’t have to answer. At the end of the day, we allow parents to raise their children according to the dictates of their conscious provided they don’t physically or sexually abuse them. I fear that, should this Phelps case progress further, we’ll have taken a step towards a world where the children of political opponents becomes spoils of the culture war.

ANGRY parents have blasted a teacher for telling ten-year-olds to copy a Muslim prayer saying “There is no God but Allah”. Helen Green is said to have picked the Muslim call to prayer as HAND-WRITING practice.

It includes the lines “Allah is the greatest” and “I bear witness that there is no God but Allah”.

Pupil Billy Darbyshire’s stepmum Hayley Clayton said: “The explanation was that the children were learning about Islam in RE…

As one parent pointed out, it’s an oath that comes from Islam’s creed, the Shahadah:

“[I testify that] there is no god (ilah) but Allah, and [I testify that] Muhammad is the messenger of Allah. “

Of course, this is another sign of how Islam gets spread through schools in ways that it would never be tolerated for Christianity to be spread. 

(Hat Tip: Opinnnation Times)

Said one blogger :

I am so inspired by the Duggar family of Arkansas. This week they welcomed their 17th child, a beautiful little girl named Jennifer. It was a Discocer Channel Special a few years ago about their family that not only put the idea of wanting more children into my heart, but also inspired me to return to my faith in God and to get right in my walk with Him.

Observed another:

The Duggars seem to be good parents, seem to be able to provide for the children they have, seem to be thrilled with each birth. I sure hope all is as it seems, because I know how difficult it was on my Mom just with her eight.

 

God bless you Michelle Duggar with all the love and patience and strength you need.

 

Another is encouraged by the Duggars’ dedication:

I know I’m surprised. Here are seventeen children who will not lapse, without a fight, into decadent hedonism. No one knows what the future holds, and some may fall away, but the seed which the Duggers will plant will never be uprooted, and though some may leave the path, this now convinced Catholic knows that the path will never leave them.

And then there’s this comment from Peter, a father of four sons:

Jennifer and I have a lot of catching up to do.

Ah, the competitive side’s alive and well with that one. j/k. Actually, I think the situation has to be one of admiration. There’s the prodigiousness of the feat itself: 17 healthy children, 15 healthy pregnancies. There’s the admirable provider skills needed to support them. There’s the the parenting skills that’ve stopped their from becoming an unmanagable mess.

While most of us won’t want 17, or 10, or an extremely large number.  With population control and the social pressure for less kids, the public example of the Duggars encourages folks who want more children, but know that once you get past two, people start to whisper behind your back (even in the church,)  God bless them for the encouragement they’re providing.

You can be childless by choice. Premarital sex is in, way in. Cohabitation (i.e. living together, shacking up (archaic) Homosexuality and even gay marriage are okay. Individuals have the right to do whatever they want. If you don’t want an abortion, don’t have one as my pal Radical Russ opines, “don’t have one.”

In addition, adults have the right to enjoy their lives and to adopt kids. Single parents, same sex couples, really whose business is it anyway? Not only does everything go, but no one can say another’s “lifestyle choice” is wrong. That’s hate, equal to racism.

Yet, are there limits to this tolerance? Yes. And we found out today. For there’s a couple in Arkansas that can expose the true nature of the left more than all my blog posts and podcasts combined. You see Jim Bob and Michelle Duggar had their 17th child:

LITTLE ROCK, Ark. (AP) – It’s a girl – again – for the Duggars. Jim Bob and Michelle Duggar welcomed their 17th child, and seventh daughter, into the world Thursday.

Jennifer Danielle was born at 10:01 a.m. at Saint Mary’s Hospital in Rogers, Ark., the Duggars said in an interview. Jennifer weighed 8 pounds, 8 ounces and arrived five days after Michelle’s due date.

Less than 30 minutes after giving birth, the Duggars already were talking of having more.

“We’d love to have more,” Michelle said, adding that the girls are outnumbered seven to 10 in the family. “We love the ruffles and lace.”

Jennifer joins the fast-growing Duggar brood, who live in Tontitown in a 7,000-square-foot home. All the children – whose names start with the letter J – are home-schooled.

The oldest is 19 and the youngest, before Jennifer, is almost 2 years old.

“We are just so grateful to God for another gift from him,” said Jim Bob Duggar, 42, a former state representative. “We are just so thankful to him that everything went just very well.”

Jennifer joins siblings Joshua, 19; John David, 17; Janna, 17; Jill, 16; Jessa, 14; Jinger, 13; Joseph, 12; Josiah, 11; Joy-Anna, 9; Jedidiah, 8; Jeremiah, 8; Jason 7; James 6; Justin, 4; Jackson, 3; Johannah, almost 2.

The family includes two sets of twins.

Hat Tip: Right Mind

I knew there would be fireworks from across the blogosphere and MySpace. Several people have decided that having this many children is a sign of insanity:

There’s this blog , this blog, this blog, this blog, and this MySpacer, This MySpacer, and another MySpacer that just say that. Psychic Donut suggests they’re stupid (we’re at the real high level of discussion here) and curses that stupid supportive community:

What makes this even more annoying is that the community supports this madness with clothing and donations.

Dang! Supportive community. Why can’t all of us have neighbors who couldn’t care less about us:

Because after all, how can the “mother” have a career when she has been pregnant for more than 10 years of her life, and is ready to pop out another?

Apparently, women are free to do anything they’d like except not have a career.

Others get a tad more violent with their feelings. Says one MySpacer (language advisory)

The only thing worse than white trash…is Christian Fundamentalist white trash. I personally volunteer to castrate Jim Bob, remove the (expletive deleted) womb, and de-program the offspring and force them to turn against their own kind. Any of you are welcome to help.

Of course one might say this MySpacer’s a fringe nut, but this has drawn a denouncement from a columnist for a major newspaper. Yes, with all the utter depravity and corruption going on in his home town, Columnist Mark Moford (whose paper apparently considers freaken’ professional language for a newspaper column) ripped into the Duggars when they were last in the news: (Hat Tip: Constitutionally Correct)

Who are you to judge? Who are you to say that the more than slightly creepy 39-year-old woman from Arkansas who just gave birth to her 16th child yes that’s right 16 kids and try not to cringe in phantom vaginal pain when you say it, who are you to say Michelle Duggar is not more than a little unhinged and sad and lost?

And furthermore, who are you to suggest that her equally troubling husband — whose name is, of course, Jim Bob and he’s hankerin’ to be a Republican senator and try not to wince in sociopolitical pain when you say that — isn’t more than a little numb to the real world, and that bringing 16 hungry mewling attention-deprived kids (and she wants more! Yay!) into this exhausted world zips right by “touching” and races right past “disturbing” and lurches its way, heaving and gasping and sweating from the karmic armpits, straight into “Oh my God, what the hell is wrong with you people?”

It’s wrong to be this judgmental. Wrong to suggest that it is exactly this kind of weird pathological protofamily breeding-happy gluttony that’s making the world groan and cry and recoil, contributing to vicious overpopulation rates and unrepentant economic strain and a bitter moral warpage resulting from a massive viral outbreak of homophobic neo-Christians across our troubled and Bush-ravaged land. Or is it?

Wow, of course, this is some of his more dispassionate analysis. He goes on:

I have a friend who used to co-babysit (yes, it required two sitters) for a family of 10 kids, and she reports that they were, almost without fail, manic and hyper and bewildered and attention deprived in the worst way, half of them addicted to prescription meds to calm their neglected nerves and the other half bound for years of therapy due to complete loss of having the slightest clue as to who they actually were, lost in the family crowd, just another blank, needy face at the table. Is this the guaranteed affliction for every child of very large families? Of course not. But I’m guessing it’s more common than you imagine.

Well, I don’t have proof that the Duggar family has this problem, but let’s raise the specter of it. It’s interesting, because Moford isn’t the only one who raises the point.

I have a hard time believing that a kid that grows up with 16 brothers and sisters is happy about never having a childhood (as they jump in to help raise the younger ones), never get a new item but always hand me downs, and probably doesn’t have the faintest clue of what “normal” family means. -Psychic Donut

The parents are so proud of how the older ones take care of the younger ones and raise them, but why should the older children be penalized. ? Of course they (the children) all love it because they don’t know any different, but I did have a childhood and goodness knows I didn’t want or need the responsibility of taking care of anyone but myself at that age. I just think they need to be kids. If the parents want to have all 17 and raise all of them and parent all of them , that’s great! I don’t expect my 9 year old to bathe my 13 month old or dress him, change his diapers, or get him to sleep at night. (I believe the mother has full charge of the child until age 2 and then she passes it on to another)-Army Blogger Wife

Still to me there is a bigger question than these, how can the parents find time to spend with the kids. There are only so many hours in the day and many of those are taken by work/school responsibilities.-Random Thoughts, Do They Have Meaning

Interesting, many people are sympathetic to their argument, but would those same people say that gay adoption is wrong. How do we justify refusing kids an upbringing by a father and mother? What about the case against no fault divorce for married couples with kids? What about keeping taxes so high to pay for well-meaning social programs that women have to work to keep family afloat, shovin’ kids into daycare.

In multiple living situations, the kids are not considered, but now everyone’s worrying about the kids as to whether they’re getting parental love and attention, because everybody (particularly those who have been raised in small families) can’t figure out how they manage it, so therefore they’re not.

Others echo concerns about the environment:

Okay, who the hell has 17 babies and wishes God to bless them with more? Answer: Freaks, that’s who. Helloooo–if everyone had more than a dozen kids, can you honestly see the world being a better place? It would be a damn hell hole! In about 2 weeks, all of the world’s resources would be depleated and we’d be sweating our (expletives) off due to global warming on steroids. -Swanky Beast

They think children are a gift from God. That may be, but they also contribute to pollution, overpopulation, and consumption of our resources. -Run. Light

I didn’t know Arkansas was the nexis of world overpopulation problems. Of course some folks were a tad more drastic in their solutions:

The Hartford Advocate describes Mrs. Duggar in terms I won’t reprint and then goes on:

As my friend Parke says, “Instead of being celebrated, their profligate procreation should be decried and mandatory sterilization imposed immediately upon these crazy people. I propose: a progressive federal tax on children beyond the second one per couple. Or at least eliminating tax deductions for them.”

Jeremy Slater praises China’s one-child policy:

Say what you want about the tenants of Communism, Dude, but you’ve got to hand it to the Chinese when it comes to their strict pro-baby-killin’ stance. One child per family may seem monstrous and cruel until you consider these Arkansas (expletive deleted) crapping out new mouths faster than last night’s taco dinner.

I mean, I certainly can’t think of a compelling argument for NOT blasting Jim Bob (OF COURSE his name is Jim Bob) and his Amazing Vag-O-Matic wife into the cold comfort of deep space. As for his sad gaggle of emotionally-neglected Children of the Corn, the kindest thing would be to send them to 17 separate foster homes. Let them experience for the first time what it’s like to have parents who actually give a (expletive deleted) about you.

Wow, way to show your true colors. Population Control=controlling our lives.

Of course some bloggers have a problem with all these kids belonging to the Duggars. Why don’t they adopt demands one blogger:

After all, it isn’t your fault that millions of unwanted children are suckling at the teat of the government system while your considerable resources are devoted to extending the branches of your divine family tree!…If half those kids were adopted, I’d be a hell of a lot more impressed.

You want to adopt? Go for it. When we have the savings in place, Andrea and I will probably be going that route.  But why harsh someone else for not adopting when they have 17 natural children of their own? Haven’t you been reading all the posts about how this is so bad for their children to have so many siblings and you want to throw in some adopted ones?

Of course, for some the fear runs deeper, more political:

Perhaps the point is this: Why does this sort of bizarre hyperbreeding only seem to afflict antiseptic megareligious families from the Midwest? In other words — assuming Michelle and Jim Bob and their massive brood of cookie-cutter Christian kidbots will all be, as the charming photo suggests, never allowed near a decent pair of designer jeans or a tolerable haircut from a recent decade, and assuming that they will all be tragically encoded with the values of the homophobic asexual Christian right — where are the forces that shall help neutralize their effect on the culture? Where is the counterbalance, to offset the damage?

Where is, in other words, the funky tattooed intellectual poetess who, along with her genius anarchist husband, is popping out 16 funky progressive intellectually curious fashion-forward pagan offspring to answer the Duggar’s squad of über-white future Wal-Mart shoppers? Where is the liberal, spiritualized, pro-sex flip side? Verily I say unto thee, it ain’t lookin’ good.-Mark Moford

And I don’t know, maybe I am the only one who notices but generally all the idiots, non-educated people, losers and low-lives have tons of kids, while the ones who really should be having them have either none, or one to two. So maybe I am off the rocker yet again, but at times it feels as if we are literally out-bred by people who definitely shouldn’t run the country.  -Psychic Donut

There’s some truth to this. The Fertility Gap has been covered in numerous places. The education of the heart and mind being done by homeschoolers is a positive thing and with the state of our world, many of the current generation of homeschoolers will be the leaders of tomorrow. Not all posts leapt to the visceral level, we’ve seen. Writes Joy:

And, while my first reaction was to make a snarky remark about this family, I thought of Sam, and realized, who the hell am I to judge this family? And, well, my aunt recently sent me my Victory family tree, which is far more horizontal than vertical — both of my paternal grandparents were born into huge families.

An Agnostic delivered the wisest thoughts of the day on this matter, writing on the Discovery Forums and later on her blog:

Those on this board who wish to attach their personal morality upon this ‘odd’ family are absolutely NO different from what they claim to abhore. Because we are Americans we can CHOOSE our own path. Freedom is our greatest blessing.

As far as choosing for their children, EVERY parent does that. Some parents choose to raise children as neo-nazis, or model behaviors of alcohol and drug addiction, some create homes of such abnormalty – the children will grow up to write best-selling memoirs.

My POINT is that who are you to cast such stones? These kids don’t look to be deprived. So they’re homeschooled, big deal (and I’m a public school teacher), about 3% of the US is now homeschooling. And if you look at the homeschool statisics … you’ll have no ground on which to stand. Period.

When I see media concerning people different from myself, whether they’ve made different choices or live in a different culture, I like to learn about them. I’m interested to know their ideals and their motivations. But it’d be wrong for me to exert my own morality on them. I’d be no different than those ‘Green Terrorists’ blowing up Hummer dealerships (I drive a Nissan car). These Duggar people seem to be making their own way in the world.

It’s always jealousy that causes anger. I’ve watched it eat people alive. Some folks on here keep talking about not having enough money, or the big house, or the gifts from friends …. When I judge, because lets face it – we all have that vice, I gauge my judgements upon what a person/group is doing to hurt others.

And don’t give me that ‘control the population’ bull … not far from oppression/dictatorship that! Each of us must make our OWN choices, hopefully without hurting another. I don’t see how this family is hurting anyone.”

Read the whole thing, oveall, a very thoughtful end to this insanity.

Linked by Clayton Cramer, MD Views,  We Should Live, and The Fourth Check Raise

The following is a commentary from the Truth and Hope Report (http://www.truthandhope.2truth.com) Weekend update by Democratic Political Analyst Dave Screwtape

Father’s Day is a happy day of celebration for some people. For others, it’s a day when their guilt gets the better of them and they buy the man a tie and place a phone call in order to feel less guilty about a year of neglect.

For some, Father’s Day is a source of pain because of abusive or absent fathers.

My general opinion is that Father’s Day is hooey. I didn’t have a father around growing up, and neither did any of my illegitimate children in various remote vacation spots around the world. I turned out fine, and so did they (as far as I know.)

But, this raises a key point as to how Democrats can secure the votes of values voters and those concerned with such emotional concepts as “family.” We have taken a few key steps. The first and most important step is the redefinition of family.

For years, if one were to picture a family, you would picture the patriarchal vision of mother, father, and children, with grandfathers and grandmothers, aunts and uncles around. Now we recognize family can be anything. Family can be two gay men, two lesbian women, or a single woman adopting. Family can be non-related people brought together for non-sexual purposes. The phrase, “They’re my family” is used at thousands bars across America. The word “family” means anything and to value family one can value anything from a traditional model to a nice dinner at the Olive Garden.

The second key is to establish all family models as equal. This has been a bit of a challenge. While the right tries to establish an environment for ideal families to flourish, we refuse to acknowledge any intrinsic difference in outcome in child-rearing results with a single parent, two lesbians, two cohabitating heterosexuals, two male homosexuals, an intact heterosexual marriage, or divorced parents sharing custody. The fact is that we can find many stories of children who turned out fine raised in each of these circumstances, therefore they’re all equally okay.

What social conservatives harp on is which arrangement produces the best results for children overall. The issue is irrelevant. Children are not here for their own benefit, but for that of their parents. They are a commodity to which all people should have equal access without regard to race, marital status, sexual orientation, or gender identity. Now, this is not to say abuse can be tolerated. Should there be abuse (which naturally includes any kind of corporal punishment) a child can be removed just like you’d remove cable television from a home where you found someone wasn’t paying their bill.

Remember, we as Democrats can proudly stand for great principles, including not only family, but also faith, patriotism, and freedom—provided that we define those terms in an advantageous way and declare our definition equal, if not superior, to all others. This is Dave Screwtape.

The Screwtape Report is written by Adam Graham. The Screwtape Report is written from a Democratic perspective by a conservative in order to reveal Democratic strategy and thinking.

This Reuters story on fatherlessness is the lead item on tonight’s podcast. The costs of fatherlessness and single parenthood to our society and its children are astounding. Liberals tend to seek out government social programs that address symptoms, rather than dealing with the root of the problem: family decline. Sadly, many would rather pretend all lifestyle and family choices are equal in the face of evidence that says they are not.

Also, Republicans apparently reached a deal with Democrats to allow the disclosure of pork-laden secret earmarks in federal spending bills. I’ve been a critic of the Republican Minority when they’ve deserved it, but standing firm on this is key.

It’s also a small victory (and even that’s been called into doubt by some stories since I finished recording an hour ago) but if we can get to the point where our politicians are at least openly spending their pork rather than doing it secretyly, we’ll have made progress. (Hat Tip: Instapundit.)

Meanwhile, a study points out serious flaws in reports on abstinence programs. It seems that in order to get favored results, certain programs were cherry picked which included some common features that greatly increased the risk of failure.

To say teaching abstinence doesn’t work is silly. Some programs don’t work well or aren’t thought out. That doesn’t mean programs can’t work, only that a few haven’t. There are a multitude of different programs and to declare they all “don’t work” is merely wishful thinking. But what can we expect from the American left.

Click here to download. Click here to add my podcast to your I-tunes.

Trackposted to Outside the Beltway, Right Pundits, Perri Nelson’s Website, DeMediacratic Nation, Right Truth, Stuck On Stupid, Webloggin, The Amboy Times, Conservative Cat, Pursuing Holiness, stikNstein… has no mercy, The World According to Carl, Pirate’s Cove, Dumb Ox Daily News, High Desert Wanderer, and The Yankee Sailor, thanks to Linkfest Haven Deluxe.