NAMBLA’s Got Next?

In Newsweek? Probably.

Laugh at the “slippery slope” observations of those who oppose homosexual “marriage,” if you must, but I predict that within the next 10 years, a group of shameless tools will file suit claiming equal protection violations because they can’t legally “marry” as a threesome.

Ménage à Twits v. United States.

I’ll go a step farther and predict some shameless pervert will file suit because he can’t “marry” the underage object of his molestation.

Scoffing never hurt anybody. Failing to protect children from harm or provide a stable, mother-father home hurts too many.

Mock on…

Related post:

Murder, Marriage, and Hamster Wheels

Heather Mac Donald hits another one out of the park with a parsing of a New York Times article about the “youth crisis” of rising murder rates among blacks. Nothing new. Young black men kill each other and will continue doing so, fueled by factors like fatherlessness and family instability.

Generally speaking, there’s no one around to teach them how to be decent men and take responsibility for themselves and offspring they produce. The women in the family can’t or apparently don’t want to socialize them with the expectation of getting married and making a home of their own for themselves and their wives and children. They don’t learn how to master their impulses or direct their natural aggression to productive pursuits. And on and on.

You know my views on the matter. If not, check the archives. Search “fatherless,” “fatherlessness,” and variations on the theme.

I wanted to point you to Mac Donald’s column. Her critiques are always devastating, from my perspective. Too bad she doesn’t pop up in mainstream publications more often. In her latest City Journal article, “The Times’s Crime Confusions Persist,” she advises President-elect Barack Obama to take a new approach to reducing crime rates. If your time is short today, don’t waste it reading this post. Go straight to the article.

Mac Donald points out something I’m sure a lot of people know: the disparity between white and black homicides (10-to-1) actually is greater than the numbers show. That’s because the government includes hispanics in the “white” crime perpetrator rate category. “Hispanic crime rates are between three and four times that of whites—meaning that if one excluded the Hispanic homicides from the white rate, the black-white differential would be even larger than ten to one,” she writes.

Curiously, hispanic victims of crime are broken out into a separate category. This tactic masks the real horror (substitute sadness, atrocity, whatever works for you) of violent crime among blacks (and hispanics). That’s the point, I suspect.

American boysMac Donald also gets to the root of the problem, one so many people tend to ignore or downplay: marriage. A stabilizing and civilizing influence on men and boys and the conduit through which values and valuable life/family lessons are passed down, marriage is a rarity among young blacks with children. They don’t even expect to be married. They have sex, make babies and excuses, and pass this sorry and disrespectful behavior on to their children.

But talking about it won’t change anything, It makes for interesting conversation, though. It’s like looking at a train about to wreck. Terrible. Awful. But what can you do to stop it? It’s going too fast, and it’s a lot bigger than you are.

Mac Donald writes:

“Liberal policymakers and pundits have spilled buckets of ink over the years promoting social-service programs as the solution to crime, yet—like the Times’s recent editorial—those opinion-setters cannot squeeze out one word about the most effective anticrime (and antipoverty) strategy: marriage. The marriage imperative civilizes boys. By contrast, in a world where it is unusual for a man to marry the mother of his children, boys fail to learn the most basic lesson of personal responsibility: you are responsible for your children. Freed of the social expectation that they will have to provide a stable home for their offspring, boys have little incentive to restrain their impulses and develop bourgeois habits. In 2005, the national black illegitimacy rate was 70 percent, and it approached 90 percent in many inner cities (compared with a white illegitimacy rate of 25 percent, and as low as 6 percent in some urban areas, like the District of Columbia). The disappearance of marriage from the black community is a social cataclysm.

“Some highly structured, values-based youth programs, like the Boy Scouts, can provide boys a surrogate for the paternal authority that they lack at home; society is right to support these lifelines. But they cannot possibly bring crime down significantly among blacks in the absence of a cultural shift toward marriage. True, no one knows yet how to revive marriage in the black community. But given the imperative of doing so, you would think that somewhere in the flood of recommendations for more useless government social programs, a little space could be reserved for promoting the idea of a marriage movement.”

Mac Donald has and isn’t afraid to use common sense and put her thoughts down on paper for public consumption. Obviously, being called a racist doesn’t intimidate her in the least. Courageous and honest people are needed in a crisis, people, and but too many of us are faint-hearted.

The standard liberal solution to society’s problems in general and social pathology among blacks in particular strays far away from confronting the individual. Well-intentioned but ultimately useless social programs funded by taxpayers make liberals feel like they’re doing something. The truth is, we’re just spinning our wheels like hamsters. The character of individuals, not so much the dynamics of the group, must change.

P.S.: Instead of sending “dissenting” e-mail to me or Heather Mac Donald, send it to the men doing the killing and the men and women dooming black babies to fatherless childhoods. They deserve your scorn. We don’t.

Billy Clubs, Firehoses, and Attack Dogs for the New Civil Rights Movement

upside the head

Update (12:12 p.m.): I’ve gotten e-mails, Facebook comments, and tweets about why I’ve closed comments on the blog. Life is just easier without them, and I can focus on other things during the day. When I get three comments on a long post, I spend too much time wondering why. When a post brings out the trolls, I kick myself for opening comments. (It is liberating to say what you’ve got to say “soapbox” style and not wonder about or even expect feedback.) But this topic is worth it, so I’ll open the post up for discussion.

Continue reading “Billy Clubs, Firehoses, and Attack Dogs for the New Civil Rights Movement”

Race and Lifestyle Choice: A Blood-Boilingly Bad Comparison

water fountainChecking my Facebook e-mail today, I saw a “vote no on Prop 8” ad. The measure, which appears on the California state ballot, would define marriage as between only a man and a woman. The irritants who created this ad used a picture of a black man at a “colored” water fountain from the 1950s or 1960s, similar to the one on the right.

Nothing gets me riled up quite like a homosexual, especially a white male, whining about his inability to legally “marry” another male and comparing himself to blacks who were forbidden to sip from “Whites Only” water fountains or made to go through back doors of business establishments like restaurants.

It makes me want to vomit, too. 😡

Imagine traveling back in time and telling some of those church-going folks getting beat upside the head, sprayed with firehoses, attacked by dogs, drenched with soda and food at Woolworth’s during a sit-in demonstration, and called “Niggers” that they’re enduring all this nonsense so that one day, two men could make a mockery of marriage.

Give me a freakin’ break! Two people, three people, four or more people of any sex can do whatever they want to do to each other. I don’t care! And no one is stopping you from marrying. You just can’t marry a person of the same sex. You also can’t marry your sister or your father or a minor or more than one person at a time. You have the same civil rights as the rest of us, but marriage is not a civil right. The civil rights movement was about giving blacks what had been withheld from them for a long time: the right to the same constitutional protections enjoyed by everyone else. Homosexuals, heterosexuals, asexuals, or whatever, are under those same protections. But what homosexuals want are special rights, one of which involves overhauling the institution of marriage. You have no civil right to do that.

It’s maddening, not to mention insulting, when homosexuals co-opt the language and imagery from that turbulent era to push such an agenda. (I’m choosing my words carefully here.)


Socially Conservative/Faith Issues on State Ballots

Marriage: Arizona, California, and Florida will have measures on the ballot to amend state constitutions to define marriage as between only one man and one woman.

'abortable' baby at 16 weeksChild Killing: Californians will vote on whether “doctors” should be required to notify a parent or guardian 48 hours before killing a minor’s unborn baby.

Colorado voters will weigh in on the Personhood Amendment, which would define “person…as any human being from the moment of fertilization.” Yes, life begins at conception. It’s a shame the issue is up for a vote, but there you go. 😕

No matter what voters decide about the amendment, life still begins at conception.

In South Dakota, voters will choose whether the state may prohibit child killing except in cases of rape, incest, or to protect the mother’s health (which I believe is just a red herring). I don’t agree with such exceptions, as I’ve explained here. People call me an extremist, a label I wear with pride.

More at WORLD Magazine.

Related post:

More Tolerable For The Land Of Sodom In The Day Of Judgment…

By now I’m sure you know about the Connecticut Supreme Court’s Friday ruling. Four of seven judges said homosexuals have a “right” to marry. After being outlawed and stigmatized for thousands of years throughout most cultures and every major religion, sodomy has gone mainstream. An attempt to make respectable that which perverts God’s order of things…it’s a pity. But we are without excuse.

John Martin, 'Destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah'It’s like this: I tell you what God says about it. I pray for you. But I don’t care what consenting adults, homosexual or otherwise, do in private. I really don’t. I don’t want to know or have anything to do with your business. But I’m forced to know and to care, because certain people are pushing to redefine marriage in order to normalize what is abnormal and make acceptable what is abhorrent.

Did you know that in California, homosexuals can register as domestic partners and receive rights, protections, and benefits? But they want much more than mere rights, protections, and benefits. Homosexuals who want to “marry” in the traditional meaning of the word seek a societal stamp of approval. They want us to accept them as normal. They want “dignity” and “respect” for their unions.

At the same time, they want to shake up the foundation and build a new one. They want to strip us of our prerogative to make judgments. Anything we have to say contrary to what they desire is “bigoted” and “intolerant.” They are the only ones allowed to judge.

Not on my watch.

California’s a weird place. It’s a got a raging-liberal reputation, yet 61.4 percent of voters chose to ban homosexual “marriage” in 2000. In June, the California Supreme Court overturned that law 4-3. Four judges said the people’s will was nil. Consequently, over a million Californians signed a petition for Proposition 8, which defines marriage as between only a man and a woman. The measure will appear on the November 4 ballot.

I arrived in California too late to sign the petition, but I will be voting YES on Proposition 8.

Later…As expected, the ballot language presupposes that “same-sex” couples have a right to marry, which they do not:


No matter how hard you try, you can’t eliminate all instances of bias. 😕

By the way, if you can’t afford a parochial school, homeschool your kids.

John McCain on November 4

Update: Believers for Barack. I just don’t see it.

On the morning of November 5, 2008, some of us will be disappointed and others pleased. I voted for the first time at age 25. I pulled the lever for Bill Clinton in 1992 and again in 1996. I escaped leftism and voted for George Bush in 2000 and again in 2004.

electoral map 9/15/08When it comes to presidential elections, I’ve always been on the winning side. I’ve never had the dreaded feeling of waking up the day after an election and being bitterly disappointed. I hope the streak continues. 😕

(Click on the thumbnail to see larger map.)

I know I’ve said and written that it doesn’t matter to me who’s in the White House. Hey, frustration makes say such things. Of course it matters. America won’t fall apart if Barack Obama is elected president.

But it will become less like the place I know and love.

Continue reading “John McCain on November 4”

Californians, Obama Says You’re ‘Divisive and Discriminatory’

votingIf you believe marriage should be defined as between one man and one woman, you are divisive and discriminatory, said future President Barack Hussein Obama (Source).

But by his own logic, BHO’s also divisive and discriminatory, because he reportedly said he believes marriage should be defined as between a man and a woman. I don’t get it. Which is it, BHO?

There’s more. Once upon a time, BHO said the issue of homosexual “marriage” should be left to the states. The people should vote yay or nay. He’s apparently changed his mind. Now he believes homosexual “marriage” should be forced on the people by the courts.

You may recall that after the California Supreme Court overturned a law banning homosexual “marriage” last month, the people of California leapt into action, adding over one million signatures to a petition to put the question on the November ballot. Californians will get to decide whether homosexuals can “marry” in their state. But BHO cried foul.

Continue reading “Californians, Obama Says You’re ‘Divisive and Discriminatory’”

Fatherlessness As Child Abuse?

baby***Scroll down for clarification***

Over the years, through what I’ve seen with my own eyes and heard from others, I’ve come to believe that deliberately depriving a child of a father is a form of child abuse.

That’s not a popular position to hold. What’s doubly sad is that criticizing people who deprive children this way is worse than actually depriving the children. Why? Please explain.

Losing a father through death is awful, but it’s not the same as losing him through divorce or being born into a fatherless home. In whichever case, a child will feel abandoned, but losing a father through divorce and being deprived of one from birth are deliberate acts of abandonment, worse than death in a sense. When a family loses a father through death, they keep his memory alive. His authority lingers. The children grow up knowing he loved them and their mother, made sacrifices for their well being, and did not walk out on them to pursue his own interests.

Three out of four black babies are born in the United States to women who aren’t married to the fathers. Fatherlessness leads to a multitude of problems, the worst of which is the repeated cycle of fatherlessness. You’ve read the studies. Even if you haven’t, you’ve seen firsthand the effects of fatherlessness on children, especially boys.

Continue reading “Fatherlessness As Child Abuse?”

Exercise Your Freedom to Offend

American flagI love this country. I really do. Love it. From a biblical perspective, I shouldn’t love it as much as I do.

You know why I love it? One of the reasons is because the Gospel of Jesus Christ is offensive, and this country gives me the right to “preach Christ crucified.”

Yes, the Gospel is offensive. I mean, telling people they’re straight up sinners with unclean hearts, giving them a “heads up” about being under God’s wrath, and claiming the only way to God is through Jesus Christ? He even said so himself. Talk about bold. What audacity.

The Gospel offends people who don’t believe these things. It’s funny, though, that some who claim not to believe in hell are offended when told they’re going to hell. Never figured that out. Anyway, in America, we have the freedom to offend. There is no freedom to not be offended. Suck it up, as they say.

Christian apologist, debater, pastor, author, blogger, and webcaster James White, a man whose faithful witness and defense of the faith has helped me grow in faith and understanding (he commented on LBC the other day – down, fangirl!), frequently blogs about the suppression of the Gospel in Canada. See Canada Joins those Nations that Prohibit Free Speech and Gospel Preaching.

Continue reading “Exercise Your Freedom to Offend”

Court Upholds Discrimination Against Incestuous and Polygamous Couples

ringsUpdate II (6/4): This just in: “California’s highest court has refused to stay until after the November election its decision legalizing same-sex marriage in the state…Conservative religious and legal groups had asked the California Supreme Court to stop its order from becoming effective until voters have the chance to weigh in on the issue…An initiative that would amend the state constitution to ban gay marriage has qualified for the ballot. Its passage would overrule the court’s decision.” (Source)

Update (6/3 @ 11:35 a.m.): I knew that as a result of this court decision, concerned Californians were trying to get an initiative on the November ballot that would define marriage as between a man and a woman. One of those 1,120,801 signatures belongs to my sister. Way to go, S! I am pleased to report that the initiative will appear on the November ballot. Tip of the beach hat to Randy Thomas.

But Californians already spoke on this issue. In the case I blogged about below, the California Supreme Court overturned Proposition 22, passed in 2000 by 61.4 percent of voters. The people speak, and the court overturns. So the voters will speak again on this issue in November. Make no mistake: this is a war, folks. Round and round and round it goes.

Continue reading “Court Upholds Discrimination Against Incestuous and Polygamous Couples”

Nooses Are Nice…

Florencia-13…compared to being slaughtered by a gang thug, that is.

Ever wonder why black folks are wasting time worrying about random nooses when hispanic gangs in Southern California are “systematically” targeting “innocent black civilians” because they’re black? (Source)

(See Media myths about the Jena Six)

As I’ve said time and time again on this blog, raising a ruckus over hispanic-on-black and black-on-black violence is not lucrative to the professional civil rights establishment, not soul-satisfying to blacks who see white racism in every corner, and not sexy enough for jaded liberal journalists to bother covering.

Those fools are too busy fixating on white-on-black violence, or even the mere suggestion of white-on-black violence, as relatively rare as it is.

Continue reading “Nooses Are Nice…”

Random Observation on Islamofascism and America’s Counterintuitive Approach to Fighting It

The Faces of Global Terrorism

Monday, October 22: Islamofascism Awareness Week. Has a nice ring to it.

So I was standing in a security line at Reagan National Airport couple weeks ago when I saw a poster titled, “The Faces of Global Terrorism.” (PDF copy – also see the State Department press release) All 26 appeared to be light- to medium-brown skinned, young, Middle Eastern men of Arab descent – every last one. No women. No whites. No blacks. No Asians.

I couldn’t help but spot the almost painful irony of standing in a long security line – where I was required to take off my shoes and stand on a dirty airport floor and empty my laptop bag and watch comically serious TSA agents confiscate lotion in 8-ounce containers instead of the requisite 3 ounces and eye little old white ladies as they walked through metal detectors – of mostly white passengers, women, and a few blacks and Asians. I don’t recall seeing one person in line who looked or dressed like any of the men on the poster.

Continue reading “Random Observation on Islamofascism and America’s Counterintuitive Approach to Fighting It”

Sin Sickness

Hey, a sin is a sin is a sin. In God’s eyes, bearing false witness and stealing are just as sinful as this. But something about the latter causes me to shudder in disgust. Can’t help it.

Hate e-mail aside, I have to say this. Our culture is in full descent mode. All we Christians can do is warn the world that the kingdom of heaven is at hand and that Christ is returning to deliver the Father’s wrath on the unrepentant. We’re marking time in a fallen world (as we pray, “Even so, come, Lord Jesus!”). And it’s going to get a lot worse.

Update (9/1): The same fool of a judge who ordered that Iowa’s ban on homosexual “marriage” be lifted just issued a stay on homosexual “marriage” applications, pending appeal.

Related posts:


He Talk Like A White BoyIn my not-so-humble opinion, the single most pressing issue in the “black community,” however you define it, is that black men have abandoned their children.

I don’t need to lay out the arguments and post statistics related to drug use, criminality, underachievement, promiscuity, and teenage pregnancy among fatherless children. You’ve read and heard it all before.

It’s a vicious cycle. Until black people start having babies within marriage the way they used to, it will be difficult to break the cycle. The chances that a fatherless boy will grow up with the expectation of getting married first, having children later, and supporting his family are quite low. It’s not likely he’s learning how to be a husband, father, and provider from the women in his family, who themselves probably were fatherless and are rearing fatherless children. It’s awful. Blacks have done this terrible thing to themselves and have no one to blame but themselves.

I’d love to go on CNN and talk about that.

Joseph C. Phillips, actor and author of He Talk Like A White Boy, addresses this issue in his latest column. An excerpt:

Continue reading “Slackness”