Queering Our Schools

More dangerous ideas from Obama’s ‘safe schools czar’
The Washington Times | Oct. 16, 2009

Fifty-three Republican congressmen yesterday demanded that President Obama fire his embattled “safe schools czar,” Kevin Jennings. Mr. Jennings’ bizarre sexual agenda for American grade schools is one reason the president should dump this dangerous radical.

Mr. Jennings wrote the foreword to a 1998 book titled, “Queering Elementary Education.” The book he endorsed was a collection of essays by different authors who supported teaching young children about homosexuality. Mr. Jennings’ foreword explains why he thinks it is important to start educating children about homosexuality as early as activist-educators can get away with doing so. “Ask any elementary-school teachers you know and – if they’re honest – they’ll tell you they start hearing [anti-homosexual prejudice] as soon as kindergarten.” And “As one third-grader put it plainly when asked by her teacher what ‘gay’ meant: ‘I don’t know. It’s just a bad thing.’ ” [Read more…]

Facebooktwitterredditpinterestlinkedintumblrmail

Nazis And Commies

American Thinker | by Bernie Reeves | Oct. 11, 2009

Is the fascination with Nazis in Western culture a product of natural interest, or is it an unspoken pact by novelists and filmmakers to obscure the greater atrocities committed by the Soviets — most notably under Stalin, who ruled in the same era as Hitler?

A recent documentary on the Turner Classic Movie cable channel illustrated the point. Said the commentators, when all else fails in selecting a villain, make Nazis the sinister evil force and success is assured. Yet the idea to create Soviet villains never appears to occur to novelists and filmmakers, except in spy thrillers where each side is usually defined as morally equivalent. [Read more…]

Facebooktwitterredditpinterestlinkedintumblrmail

Nobel’s Stockholm Syndrome

Townhall | by Jerry Bowyer | Oct. 9, 2009

It was because of a woman named Bertha Kinsky. She was a pacifist and a free-thinker (which means anti-religious). He fell in love with her, and they married, but she left him. He was wealthy, but not intellectually respected. He inherited his father’s industrial business, which was, horror of horrors, an arms manufacturer. He was not a college graduate, but he learned chemistry anyway and developed dynamite, and became one of the wealthiest men in the world. He went on to write poems and anti-Christian plays, but they never respected him. She never really respected him. Alfred Nobel had money, but not status. [Read more…]

Facebooktwitterredditpinterestlinkedintumblrmail

Flush with Self-Righteousness

American Thinker | by Rosslyn Smith | Oct. 5, 2009

Environmentalist dreams are starting to rub Americans raw. Greenpeace has turned its attention to an issue that invites both the reporter and readers to make them the butt of jokes, but which is no laughing matter in the end. They are dumping on the manufacture of plush toilet paper on the grounds that it helps destroy the environment. [Read more…]

Facebooktwitterredditpinterestlinkedintumblrmail

Child Rape and the Values of People Who Make Films

Townhall | by Dennis Prager | Oct. 6, 2009

We have reason to be grateful to the Polanski affair. It offers that most needed of virtues: clarity. It has made the average citizen aware of how broken the cultural elite’s moral compass is. And it has illuminated how equally distorted their self-image is. They see themselves as morally superior. They see themselves as worldly when in fact they are profoundly insular. And they see themselves as courageous artists when in fact the rarest films are those that involve any moral courage (for example, how many films about Islamic terror and the world that incubates that terror can you name?)

But the greatest benefit of the Polanski affair may be that the next time you see the Hollywood elite come out on behalf of or against some public issue, you can most likely assume the opposite is the morally correct position. [Read more…]

Facebooktwitterredditpinterestlinkedintumblrmail

Nation of Men, Not of Laws

American Thinker | by Tad Wintermeyer | Oct. 1, 2009

Roman Polanski and his allies seek to rape the United States and her Constitution. While this metaphor may seem repugnantly acerbic, it rings true. Webster defines rape as the act of seizing and carrying away by force. The thin raiment that hid the left’s hatred and disdain for our Nation’s Constitution has been torn to shreds by their vocal support of a convicted rapist and sodomist. Instead of defining what ‘is’ is, the left has stooped to define what ‘rape’ rape is. The left has laid bare its enmity towards justice and the rule of law. According to the left, the Constitution is “fundamentally flawed” because it is a concrete, tangible document based on moral absolutes, granting individuals superior power over their government. [Read more…]

Facebooktwitterredditpinterestlinkedintumblrmail

The left still doesn’t get it

American Thinker | by Geoffrey P. Hunt | Sep. 19, 2009

Despite steady progress in achieving their ambition, lefties have acquired neither clue nor interest in how things actually work. Imagine the destruction when the revolucion has transferred power from the oppressor class to them. Suffice that whatever works now isn’t controlled by lefties, which is why whatever does work, works.

The lefties’ only work experience has been organizing protests, crafting slogans and manipulating the media. But regular Americans, in addition to their day jobs in building America and making it work have now also learned the stagecraft of protesting, sloganeering and leveraging the alternative media, while upstaging the mainstream media. [Read more…]

Facebooktwitterredditpinterestlinkedintumblrmail

When It Comes to Sex, the Left Hates Science

SalvoMag | by Hunter Baker | Autumn 2009

It has become an article of faith among those on the secular left that they are the natural allies of scientific rationality. At the time of the 2004 election, both Robert Reich and Garry Wills styled religious conservatives as the enemies of science who threatened to bring in a new dark age. This appraisal, excessively flattering and self-congratulatory to themselves, while unfairly condemnatory of others, arises from two on-going campaigns.

The first, which has been running far longer than any play on Broadway, is the organized effort by partisans of Darwinism to eviscerate the social influence of Christianity. [Read more…]

Facebooktwitterredditpinterestlinkedintumblrmail

The Bigger the Government, the Smaller the Citizen

Townhall | Dennis Prager | Sep. 1, 2009

Those of us who oppose a massive increase in the role the national government plays in health care (“ObamaCare”) do so because we fear the immense and unsustainable national debt it would incur and because we are certain that medical care in America would deteriorate. But there is a bigger reason most of us oppose it: We believe that the bigger the government becomes, the smaller the individual citizen becomes. [Read more…]

Facebooktwitterredditpinterestlinkedintumblrmail

The U.N.’s Shocking Sexuality Guidelines

American Thinker | Janice Shaw Crouse | Aug. 30, 2009

During the summer slump, two United Nations agencies — United Nations Economic, Social and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) and the United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA) — issued highly controversial new guidelines for sexuality education of children around the world. These groups have a long history of pushing “reproductive health care,” and the new report, International Guidelines on Sexuality Education, builds on an earlier report released by the International Planned Parenthood Federation to promote the “need and entitlement” for sexuality education for children beginning at age five. [Read more…]

Facebooktwitterredditpinterestlinkedintumblrmail