I must admit I became angry when I read Edward Hudgins' op-ed in The Christian Post, entitled, "GOP Should Invite Social Conservative 'Extremists' to Leave." People like Mr. Hudgins already agree with Democrats on social issues, so I propose that they take their fiscally conservative views and register as Democrats. After all, many fiscal conservatives believe that the fiscal issues are more important than the social issues. So why are they demonizing people like me on issues that are of (supposed) lesser importance?
Besides, unlike what Mr. Hudgins and others like him assert, social liberals are the true extremists. Here's why.
Social liberals probably think that by supporting gay marriage, they are supporting a policy that is based on limited government and freedom. Almost none of these can explain the exact legal changes that must be made to accommodate gays into marriage. It is these legal changes that are so highly problematic, and are so extreme. more >>
The end of local control of education looms as 46 states have signed onto the Common Core, a set of national K-12 education standards and federally funded tests. Opposition to it, though, is suddenly burgeoning into a full-blown national movement, with 13 states either not participating or seriously rethinking the issue.
Governors and potential presidential candidates should especially take note. In state after state, parents, especially moms, have driven the movement against the Common Core. It's hasn't seen much coverage by talk radio, and perhaps for that reason many elected leaders have failed to notice the fervor and rising opposition. But they should not underestimate the American people. They will soon have to account for their action, or inaction.
Indiana Governor Mike Pence is one such leader. Indiana is among the latest states to question the wisdom of the Common Core. There, the state senate recently voted 38-11 in favor of anti-Common Core legislation. And Pence now has the opportunity to affirm the state's desire for local control over education, well separate from government bureaucrats and big money interests. more >>
Did you realize that Wednesday, April 10, was "National Siblings Day?" Chances are you haven't heard much about the occasion because it is not widely recognized, although it should be! When it comes to the topic of raising multiple children, the media is quick to focus on the cost of parenting in the modern age and the challenges of sibling rivalry. But brothers and sisters give us so much to celebrate. Siblings make life meaningful and fun, help create countless memorable moments among families both young and old, and should never be taken for granted.
So how did National Siblings Day start? The occasion was founded in 1998 by Claudia Evart as a way for siblings to honor, recognize and celebrate each other. Evart, born and raised in New York City, started a non-profit charity called the Siblings Day Foundation to honor the memory of her own late sister and brother who died in separate accidents at an early age. Evart chose April 10 as Siblings Day because it was the birthday of her late sister, Lisette. "Like many, I have these pictures of my brother and sister, who are both gone, but remain with me daily, not just in these pictures, but also in my daily thoughts and in my heart," she said. "I lost both of them in tragic accidents, making me understand the everlasting bond we have with our siblings."
While Siblings Day still has a long way to go to be formally recognized and widely celebrated in the U.S., awareness of this occasion is growing, especially through social media. Many celebrities took to Facebook to acknowledge their brothers and sisters, and "Happy National Siblings Day" is even a trending topic on Twitter. Fox News also had some fun with the holiday Wednesday morning, as "Fox & Friends" anchor Gretchen Carlson called her sister for some sisterly bonding and co-host Brian Kilmeade squeezed in a little brotherly love with his brothers, Jim and Steve Kilmeade, who took a seat on the curvy couch to reminisce about growing up together. more >>
It can now be said, MSNBC news anchor Melissa Harris-Perry has clearly shown to all of America that this news network has hired illiterate, agenda-driven news personnel to report the news. Ms Perry was quoted as saying, "Our children really don't belong to you, they belong to the collective," (Reference Agenda 21). Ms. Perry represents the view of a minority who would yet again bring another 'collective' blow to the American family. This time it's hidden in their rhetoric that the 'collective' thinkers have not spent enough money on public education, thus creating illiterate (in this commentary I refer to the definition of illiterate as having little or no knowledge of a particular subject) children across America and they are blaming you.
Let's get something straight right now! Our children attending schools across the country are not illiterate, rather they aren't taught about our great history, about respect, and about consequence for their actions. As Gomer Pyle said so many times, surprise, surprise, surprise!
It's the parent who is illiterate, and the reasons could fill the Rose Bowl ten times over. more >>
Note: This is part two of a four-part interview. You can read part one, Sex Trafficking in America: One Survivors Story here.
This is the second part of Z's story of surviving sex trafficking. In the introductory first part Z explained why she has decided to tell her story. Throughout the interview Kingdom in the Midst will be abbreviated KM.
KM: Tell us a little of your childhood. more >>
In it's deliberations to consider of the legality of same sex marriage, the Supreme Court recently heard arguments from various parties on both sides of this divisive issue. One such supporting argument deserves particular attention for those of us concerned with the health and well being of children. In their recent brief to the Supreme Court, the American Sociological Association states, "Whether a child is raised by same-sex or opposite-sex parents has no bearing on a child's wellbeing". This conclusion is based on various studies that measured such outcomes as "academic performance, cognitive development, social development, psychological health, early sexual activity, and substance abuse" (see Hollingsworth vs Perry, US vs Windsor, NOS. 12-144, 12-307).
However faulty such studies might be (as was addressed quite thoroughly by Napp Nazworth in his recent two part series), I wish to submit that by allowing proponents of same sex marriage to frame the main arguments of this matter, we are allowing ourselves to be distracted from the more genuine central issues that are at stake. It may turn out that same sex couples can raise children just as well as opposite sex couples to achieve success in terms of those various measures. The real problem with this argument is that it draws our attention away from considering the central role that biological fathers and mothers play in our development towards healthy adulthood. And I am afraid this effort is being made not so much out of a willful attempt at distraction as from a gross misunderstanding of the central tenants of human development.
To gain a clear understanding of the important roles our biological fathers and mothers play in our development, we will need to clear the board of our preconceived ideas, and begin again by placing several essential pieces in place and discover how they fit together. The first piece is the most obvious yet essential foundation to our new understanding. We spend nearly one quarter of our lives in the presence of adult caregivers as we mature into adulthood. The second piece will shift us away from a strictly psychological perspective which emphasizes our cognitive and behavioral experience (e.g., the focus in early childhood on our first words and our first steps), and instead correctly places emotional/relational experience at the forefront as the variable which has the greatest impact on our development (see "The Irreducible Needs of Children", by Brazelton & Greenspan, 2000, DeCapo Press). more >>