Creative Minority Report: Palin Email: "A Down's Syndrome Baby will Expand your World"

Creative Minority Report: Palin Email: "A Down's Syndrome Baby will Expand your World"

Reading this today reminded me that my 53 year old mentally retarded brother really is a gift to our family.  I always think of him when I hear the song, "He Ain't Heavy, He's My Brother." (Which is kind of an inside joke because he's overweight and tells people he's having a baby.)  So this morning when he annoyed me by eating the last of the Cap'n Crunch, and waking my husband up to get his morning shave, I didn't get crabby.  I thought of Trig, and Pat and all of his Downs friends and thanked God.

Shopping for a Right to Privacy

I went to our local Playhouse to buy tickets to a musical.  The first question out of the mouth of the box-office worker was, "What is your home phone number?"  He wanted my name, address, phone number, and email address.  Sometimes I think I can't shop anymore with out giving that much information, even for eggs and bread.  And I know it's not because I'm cute and they want to call me.

Walk with me down memory lane to 1970.  People all over the country were talking about a right to privacy.  Of course this meant that you could do whatever you wanted in the privacy of your own home (illicit drugs, perverse sex with consenting adults) and that your body was yours to do with what you will (kill your baby, commit suicide).  The greatest outside intrusion on our lives came from junk mail and unwanted radio and television commercials.

Now the right to privacy, which never existed in the first place, has been suborned to the right to be tracked for commercial purposes.  You no longer have a right to remain silent and everything you say, do, buy, watch, search for on the internet, and befriend on face-book can and will be used against your bank account by luring you into spending money you don't have.(After all, who really needs a snuggie?)

The right to privacy never existed in the first place because it is a natural road block to a healthy society.  Healthy communities have standards.  When those standards are violated, the whole community suffers.  Those who are exposed to pornography, illicit drugs and perversions in secret, are not exercising the right to privacy.  They are hiding the shame of the sinful behaviors which they know instinctively are wrong.  Shame and remorse are natural emotions in everyone but sociopaths.

Parents sometimes create a breeding pool for secretive behavior by allowing children to have unmonitored televisions and computers in their rooms.  Would Anthony Wiener have tweeted his smaller self if his wife or mother could have walked into the room at any moment?

Looking back to where this started, the right to privacy protects the drug-users, perverts and those who have habits they wish to keep secret, but invades the privacy of the average Midwestern mom looking to buy dog food at the local Petco.  Everywhere I go,  "Have you shopped with us before?  May I have your phone number?"  All I wanted was theater tickets for my Dad for Father's Day.  I don't want a long-term relationship with the local playhouse. Besides they are down the street about 2 blocks.  I can walk down and ask.

The irony is that everyone has my information, and I have nothing to hide.  Those who hide their information or troll the internet using false identities have everything to hide.  I want some privacy.  But the only way to get it back is to increase respect for others and encourage a broader sense of shame for those who practice illicit behaviors. You want privacy?  Stop asking for my information.  I'm sure this will destroy the jobs of marketers and data entry clerks around the country.  Given the oversexed, tawdry nature of most advertising, the marketing crowd won't understand this article anyway.

Respect for others and a healthy sense of shame...  Imagine how those could change our world.

From CMR:Protestors Disrupt Special Olympics

Creative Minority Report: Protestors Disrupt Special Olympics

These Are Not the Candidates You are Looking For...

Yes that is a Star Wars reference.  Yes I mean the Jedi Mind Trick. And yes, I'm talking about the people whose names always top the list in national polls about GOP Candidates.  I will now list the candidates who should drop out so that their money can be used to elect the real nominee:

1. Newt Gingrich  has too much baggage.  No Tea Party people will accept him.  His time is done.
2. Gary Johnson because his manner will be perceived as weak, and his libertarian views are too purist for cultural conservatives.
3.  Ron Paul is too isolationist in his foreign policy to be taken seriously by many mainstream conservatives.  He has more of a chance than the previous two.
4. Tim Pawlenty, yawn... (Update:  Pawlenty on Cavuto just scolded those who want an entertainer in chief.  He has experience, he's unfolding plans...)
5. Mitt Romney, not only has Romney-care, but he was also governor when Boston's Catholic Charities closed their adoption program rather than provide children to homosexual couples and individuals.  He presided over the fiscal and moral funeral of Massachusetts, even though he may not have caused the death.  I have a hard time believing any serious conservative would even consider him.
6. Michele Bachmann is needed in the House.  She could be Speaker some day.
7. Rudy Giuliani has no cultural conservative chops.  After Wiener, we should not consider anyone who can't speak with some moral sense if not authority.
8. Lindsey Graham is the definition of a RINO.
9. Sarah Palin should raise funds for candidates, but not be one herself.  I don't think she really wants it.  But keeping her name out there is good for the kind of work she's good at.  She keeps the others honest,  and shows the absurdity of liberal feminists.  

Now for the candidates we should be looking for in no particular order.:

• Rick Santorum.  
• Herman Cain
• Allen West
• Paul Ryan
• Rick Perry
• John Bolton

And once the field is set, maybe the candidates should agree to serve in the cabinet of the nominee  in whatever capacity is his/her forte. 

Could we work together to show libs how it's done?  The right way?

The First Amendment: More Conscience than Speech

EWTN over the weekend reported that a bill, titled "Every Child Deserves a Family Act" ... "would prohibit 'discrimination in adoption or foster care placements'  based on sexual orientation, gender identity or marital status of any prospective adoptive or foster parent, or the sexual orientation or gender identity of the child involved.

"The bill would affect any adoption or foster care agency that receives federal assistance or contracts with an entity that receives federal assistance."  Read more: http://ewtnnews.com/catholic-news/US.php?id=3291#ixzz1NwtNBvFG

We now need to read and parse the First Amendment of the Constitution. and I do mean NEED:

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

The first two phrases of the amendment are exactly relevant to this issue.  Congress cannot interfere with the free exercise of religion, and cannot establish one itself.  By forcing religious groups to participate in adoptions to and of homosexuals, the government is in fact establishing a religion and interfering with the free exercise of religious beliefs.  

Now that isn't exactly what the proposed bill says.  What it says is that Congress will not provide federal assistance to agencies or make contracts with agencies that don't allow homosexual adoptions.  The federal funds are used by states to encourage adoptions of children in foster care, and children with special needs.  There is another $13,170 dollars in federal adoption tax credits that can be allowed for the adoptive family.  All of these funds are designed to encourage adoption.  The figure for Federal spending on adoptions was over $1.5 billion last year.  By comparison, and understanding that Planned Parenthood claims to provide adoption referrals,  Planned Parenthood received $317 million in federal funding last year.

The proposed bill would take funds away from Catholic Charities and other adoption agencies, or rather cease to augment private funding of adoptions at religious affiliated agencies.  In March of 2006, following similar regulations in Massachusetts, Catholic Charities of Boston shut down their adoption agency.  Then Governor Mitt Romney decided at the time that his administration would not act against other adoption agencies that refused to accept gays and lesbians as adoptive parents.  He used his executive office like a benevolent despot to allow religious beliefs to be expressed in action.

This is exactly what President Obama is doing in providing waivers to states, corporations, unions, etc., releasing them from the onerous expense of his healthcare program.  

And that is the crux of this issue.  The government should not be involved in adoptions and child care.  Our government should not be involved in abortion or health care.  As soon as our tax dollars are sent away, we allow someone else to determine how to allocate the money we have earned.  And then they tell us that we must follow their rules before we can get it back.

Many Catholics of good conscience would say that de-funding programs for adoption and children, or care for the elderly, is evil.  What they are missing is the fact that government intervention denies freedom of conscience.  The government can and does determine which beliefs are acceptable, and which are not.  If we don't accept those determinations, our money leaves our pockets, and never comes back to anything we can support in good conscience.  We are left to hope that our current executive will be benevolent and overlook our 'discrimination' of others based on strongly held beliefs.  We cease to be free in our exercise of our religion. 

Congress has established a religion. It is the religion of anything goes, except Catholic or Christian values.