If the Most Vulnerable Aren't Safe, Who Is?
Ohio voters approved a constitutional amendment that makes it every woman's right to kill her baby in the womb. It's part, CNN says, of a "winning trend for abortion rights advocates." And you pro-life folks were thinking you had persuaded the country of the sanctity of life. No wonder they say we are now a culture of death. And you thought "gun rights" were the issue.
Confused Bias?
It is indeed sad, but I'm confused. CNN reported that three babies died in a Gaza hospital because Israel had besieged it. Now, for someone who values human life, that's sad, but I was under the impression that baby-murder was okay in CNN's book, so I'm confused. Which side are they on? Pro-life? Or simply antisemitism?
Showing Off
California's Governor Newsom visited China's president (to share techniques?) and made sure that San Francisco was cleaned up prior to Xi Ping's visit to San Francisco. It just looks bad, governor.
Judiciary Failure
The Supreme Court has, essentially, declared that protecting children from adult entertainment is a violation of the First Amendment. Pornhub is looking at setting up permanent displays for elementary schools. Get 'em while they're young, you know? Certainly before we teach them to read or write or think.
Your Best Source for Fake News
Israel is in trouble again (still?) for raiding a hospital of all things. Mind you, they found a Hamas command and control center in the basement (real story), but Hamas claims that all those weapons were strictly for medical use. And Governor Newsom keeps making the "news." On that recent fire that shut down the I-10, one story claims that Newsom blamed it on climate change while another claims Newsom arranged it to try to prevent more people from leaving California. And, of course, there is the classic photo of a Communist dictator welcoming President Xi to California. Finally, after the massive protest in London aiming to eliminate Israel from the Middle East (real story), the Bee reported that the Nazis finally occupied London 80 years after Hitler.
Must be true; I read it on the Internet.
2 comments:
It always irks me when people say guns are the number one killer of children, when the real number one killer of children is abortion. I seriously doubt 63 million children have been killed by guns since Roe V Wade.
I have my doubts that the IDF wouldn't have helped those children, but it was Hamas preventing aid.
He even admits that was the point of cleaning up the city, like when you clean your house when company is coming.
All producers of vice strive to get people younger and younger to ensure their company's continued growth.
If the Most Vulnerable Aren't Safe, Who Is?
I found this a rather uncharacteristically convoluted post. Maybe David gets it. To that, we can remove abortions from the discussion and we will still find that guns are NOT the number one killer of children. That claim includes "young" up to about 19 years old, and as such includes so many killed in the course of gang warfare, being killed by cops while resisting arrest, etc. When they make this claim, they're purposely inflating the number of deaths from firearms using a term which provokes mental images of kids less than, say, 10-12 years old. If they gun grabbers can use that stat to compel people to believe they're only speaking of toddlers and such, they've succeeded in duping the stupid and the uninformed.
Beyond that, I don't believe too many pro-lifers believe they've made a significant degree of progress in persuading anyone about the sanctity of life. Pro-lifers are generally not blind.
Finally, to say I'm saddened that any state would have a majority supporting the murder of the conceived in utero can never be sufficient. Not sure it's accurate, either, as "contemptuous" seems a more appropriate description of how I feel.
Confused Bias?
Children, for the left, are no more than props for accessorizing and exploiting. Otherwise, children are a great inconvenience whose humanity is accepted accordingly. Again...I'm contemptuous.
Showing Off
I haven't heard...maybe you know: What did he do with all those drugged up vagrants? Move them to the alleys? It certainly shows they can do something about removing them from the public areas law-abiding, tax-paying citizens wish to traverse! Thus, the foot-dragging should no longer be acceptable, especially when election time rolls around.
Judiciary Failure
A premature description in your heading. The link doesn't suggest any failure unless the court ignoring the law in a snap judgement is how you believe these things should work. This sounds like an ongoing situation and thus, failure may yet come when it's come to its conclusion.
At the same time, I have a hard time believing there are no laws on the books from days of yore whereby some definition of lewdness isn't already codified therein. Why a newer law needs to reiterate or...please not again...redefine what is well known far and wide is something which should have been addressed, even at this stage of the game.
As to other businesses which engage in exposing kids to perversion, I don't much care how their profits are negatively impacted by this law. How many depend upon kids attending these perverse and legitimately misogynistic displays? Are we to believe that patronage drastically drops on days other than "Family Night"? Bull droppings!
As to R rated movies, few of them involve nothing but sexual content and less involving it directed at the kids who may be in attendance.
Finally, what in the wide, wide world of sports is wrong with anyone who brings their kids to LGBTQ displays of perversion and deviancy? If I were king, that would result in loss of parental rights, a term in jail and continued financial support to whomever will then be raising one's kids through their 21st birthday.
Post a Comment