The epicenter of the California earthquake was only 30 miles from Carolyn (razehell), but she is ok.
I’m taking 3 more kittens in to have them fixed and get their rabies shots this morning….Motor, Loud Mouth and Racer – the 3 baby boys. The vet student is doing these just like last time, so we are getting a big discount. Over the next 2 weeks, we’ll have the 4 girls fixed. Then all our cats will be gender neutral This is definitely a blessing from God, because it is very expensive to have animals fixed. We have spent a
small large fortune on it over the years, with all the animals we’ve had.
I spent all afternoon and most of the evening Tuesday cleaning. I moved all the furniture in our dining area and scrubbed the floors, table, chairs, antique chest (it was my great-grandparents’ dresser) and the windows by the front door. Not only the glass was filthy, but the window sills were, too. And I cleaned the shutters in the windows. Then I went upstairs and worked a little on the floors up there. I went outside and put bright yellow sunflowers in a planter hanging on the wall by the front door, and brushed off spider webs while I was out there. Then I cleaned the bench on the front porch.
The house smelled good then. I use Simple Green because it just seems to clean anything and leaves a clean smell. I also had a potpourri pot going with a Hazelnut fragrance in it, as well as several candles in “Warm Apple Pie” and “Hazelnut Creme.” Then later I actually baked an apple pie. It smelled wonderful. But I am going to be so sore in a few hours.
It’s actually still Tuesday night because I haven’t been to bed yet. I’m still doing laundry. I don’t know what I was thinking doing all this cleaning. It’s clearly a sign of mental illness. Y’all should leave that alone.
Poll Shows Distorted View of Cohabitation
‘One of the best ways to sandbag a marriage before it starts is to live together before marriage.’
Nearly half of American adults believe that cohabitation can be good for marriage, according to a recent USA Today/Gallup poll. Similarly, almost half believe living together before marriage has no effect on children.
The survey of 1,007 adults found that 49 percent believe cohabitation makes divorce less likely. Brad Wilcox, associate professor of sociology at the University of Virginia, said there is a growing body of evidence that suggests otherwise.
“People think that cohabitation is a great way to practice or test a relationship,” he said. “In reality, we know that cohabitation tends to set people up for marital failure – both in terms of high rates of divorce, but also in terms of more conflict in their marriage and less happiness.”
In addition, 47 percent of respondents said living together doesn’t negatively affect their children. Wilcox called this is a tragedy for our nation’s youth.
“Kids who are exposed to cohabitation are more likely to be physically abused, to be sexually abused, to have trouble with depression and delinquency and a number of other negative social outcomes,” he said. “One of (marriage’s) primary purposes is to secure an ideal environment for the rearing of children. We need to make sure that we are having and rearing our kids in the context of a marital union where there’s that commitment and that trust that is going to generate good things for our children.”
In a related poll released Monday by the Census Bureau, there are currently 6.4 million cohabiting couples in the U.S. That’s up 1.4 million from 2006.
Glenn Stanton, director of family formation studies for Focus on the Family, said the numbers indicate pro-family organizations and scholars haven’t done a good job of educating Americans about the harmful effects of cohabitation on marriage.
“The American people are largely clueless on the measurable benefits of marriage and the negative impact of cohabitation,” he said. “In fact, one of the best ways to sandbag a marriage before it starts is to live together before marriage.
“We need to do a better job of helping people understand that marital status and lack of marital status really has a negative impact in the lives of people.”
FOR MORE INFORMATION Learn the truth about cohabitation.
Don’t Believe Everything You Read
As California families fight tooth and nail to preserve marriage in November, the state’s attorney general made no secret of which side of the debate he was on when he launched a surprise attack on the language of Proposition 8, the initiative defining marriage as the union of a man and woman. Attorney General Jerry Brown sabotaged the amendment’s description in an obvious attempt to influence voters. Rather than use the original text, which states, “[Proposition 8] provide[s] that only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California,” Brown’s version makes sweeping claims that banning same-sex marriage would have a negative impact on the state’s economy.
He editorializes the description to state: “[Proposition 8] changes the California Constitution to eliminate the right of same-sex couples to marry. Provides that only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California. Fiscal Impact: Over the next few years, potential revenue loss, mainly sales taxes, totaling in the several tens of millions of dollars, to state and local governments. In the long run, like little fiscal impact on state and local governments.”
Perhaps the most infuriating part of the new language is that it suggests homosexuals will somehow be deprived of a “right” to marry that does not exist (except in the minds of four activist judges). Brown speculates that there will be “revenue loss… in the several tens of millions of dollars,” which is a totally unsubstantiated accusation. Knowing how the economy looms on voters’ minds, Brown is using people’s pocketbooks to prejudice them against the amendment. To cloud the issue with Brown’s personal bias is simply indefensible. ProtectMarriage, the coalition on the ground in California, announced this morning that it will file a lawsuit seeking to block the biased summary from appearing on the ballot. We will keep you updated on the case as it develops.
Adopting a Stance for Families, And Sticking By It
In an interview on “This Week with George Stephanopoulos,” Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) stuck to his guns on the issue of same-sex adoption. Despite pressure to soften his stance and hints that the McCain campaign was back-peddling on his earlier statements, McCain said plainly, “I’m running for president of the United States because I want to help with family values. And I think that family values are important…I am for the values that two-parent families, the traditional family, represents,” Sen. McCain said.
We applaud the Arizona Senator for his support of traditional families, which study upon study affirms as the best environment for raising children. I hope this is only the beginning of a longer, more pointed dialogue about pro-family policies by the GOP’s presidential nominee.
What Does Sen. Reid Have Against Babies?
Of the nearly 890 Senate bills passed this session, you may be surprised to learn that there has been debate on only 50 of them. The others were approved by “unanimous consent” with little or no discussion. Sen. Tom Coburn (R-Okla.) is one of the many conservatives frustrated by the leadership’s disregard for transparency. Repeatedly, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) has decided to ramrod legislation through the chamber without allowing any discourse between leaders. He attempted this–unsuccessfully–with a massive $11 billion spending bill last week. Mockingly called the “Coburn Omnibus” because it contained several programs and expenditures that the Oklahoma Senator opposed, Reid’s bundle of fiscally irresponsible projects failed.
Unable to exact revenge on Coburn in the omnibus, liberals are now attacking the senator for his charitable work. The Ethics panel has launched an investigation on Coburn, who, as an obstetrician, delivers babies for free. As a member of Congress, Coburn can’t receive payment for his work at Muskogee Regional Medical Center because of a “potential conflict of interest.” Since Muskogee is now a private facility, the Ethics panel says it has new concerns. Coburn’s office came out swinging. “…[P]arents don’t choose to receive his services at a particular hospital because Dr. Coburn has somehow endorsed [it]… Has Sen. Leahy provided an improper endorsement to Warner Brothers for appearing in Batman?”
Is Sen. Reid foolish enough to publicly oppose volunteerism? He and his liberal attack dogs seem bent on tearing down the generous work of a citizen legislator. No doubt this would have been a non-issue if instead of delivering babies, Sen. Coburn had offered to abort them.
Good News: Cord-Blood Stem Cells Help Toddler with Cerebral Palsy
Umbilical-cord blood has been used to treat 2-year-old Chloe Levine, who was born with cerebral palsy, a neurological disorder that prevented her from using the right side of her body.
Two months after the Pinetop, Ariz., toddler was infused with stem cells from her own umbilical-cord blood, Levine has made a 50 percent recovery and is walking, running and able to use her right hand.
Dawn Vargo, bioethics analyst for Focus on the Family Action, said: “Chloe’s recovery demonstrates that is it possible to treat children suffering from life-altering diseases without destroying young lives through destructive embryonic stem-cell research.”
Congress Reconsiders ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’ Law
The House Armed Services Committee on Wednesday debated the future of a 1993 law that bans openly homosexual men and women from serving in the military. It was the first time in 15 years Congress has reviewed the policy.
Gay activists and some members of Congress are attempting to repeal the “don’t ask, don’t tell” law. Elaine Donnelly, president of the Center for Military Readiness, and retired Sgt. Maj. Brian Jones were the only conservative voices on the panel.
“The law is good policy. The law is there and is designed to promote good order and discipline,” Donnelly said. “Equal opportunity is important, but the needs of the military – our military – must come first. … We have to make sure that policy is the best that we can have for our brave men and women in the military.”
Caleb Price, social research analyst for Focus on the Family Action, said he is concerned that Christians underestimate the resolve to repeal the ban on homosexuals in the military.
“Gay activist leaders have clearly articulated that repeal of the so-called don’t ask, don’t tell policy is one of their top three priorities following the election,” he said. “Conservatives would be foolish not to read the writing on the wall. We need to be contacting our elected representatives to let them know where we stand.”
Obama: In the World and of It
Hearts are still thumping from Sen. Barack Obama’s (D-Ill.) rock tour through Europe, but back home the trip has prompted more than a few uneasy Americans to wonder what, exactly, the Illinois Senator is running for. The man campaigning for President appears to be more consumed with becoming world sovereign than leader of the United States. These days, it’s easy to become confused about Obama’s agenda as nations trip over themselves to throw out a welcome mat for the unconventional nominee-to-be.
Using his uncanny ability to touch hearts without ever touching on policy, Obama has perfectly choreographed the trip through Europe’s progressive hotspots, where his biggest selling point seems to be his ability to distance himself from the nation he’s vying to lead. In his speech yesterday, the man whose campaign is already calling him president spent more time apologizing for America than he did representing it. With the crowd cheering and cameras flashing, Obama talked of “hope” and “change.” He spoke of disarming America of nuclear weapons and addressing climate change. He dreamed of a nation “where every language is spoken,” and every culture leaves “its imprint”–an America that puts global citizenship ahead of its moral identity.
As David Brooks said in today’s New York Times, “When John F. Kennedy and Ronald Reagan went to Berlin, their rhetoric soared, but their optimism was grounded in the reality of politics, conflict, and hard choices… Reagan didn’t call for a kumbaya moment… Obama has benefited from a week of good images. But substantively, optimism without reality isn’t eloquence. It’s just Disney.” The problem, of course, is that a lot of Americans live in a Disney world.
Sandra Day O’Connor: 4th Circuit Breaker
Going back to colonial times, Fredericksburg, Virginia has been a town that prized its religious heritage. Unfortunately, the federal court is doing what it can not to honor that history but to make it history. In 2005, after a threat from the ACLU, the Fredericksburg City Council imposed a new policy that banned prayers in Jesus’s name. One of the councilmen happened to be a Baptist pastor, Rev. Hashmel Turner, who took offense at the rule and sued the city. Pastor Turner never asked other council members to pray in the name of Jesus; he simply wanted to defend his own right to pray according to his conscience. A panel for the 4th Circuit Court of Appeals stripped him of that right, ruling unanimously that Turner was praying on the government’s behalf, and as such the prayer must be nonsectarian. Making a surprise appearance in the case was retired Supreme Court Justice Sandra Day O’Connor. O’Connor has a track record that suggests she subscribes to the notion Americans should have to choose between exercising their religion and serving in elected office. The mere fact that she was appointed to this case is ironic, since it was only necessary because Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) has failed to confirm any of the President’s nominees to fill the 4th Circuit. In fact, this week marks the one-year anniversary of Robert Conrad’s nomination to the very vacancy that O’Connor temporarily filled. If Reid and friends had done their job (one that the Senate Majority Leader said last week was unimportant), the decision would have been entrusted to the individual appointed specifically to that position-not a retired justice with a history of skepticism about the First Amendment’s Free Exercise Clause.
Focus on FOCA
A year ago this week, Senator Barack Obama (D-Ill.) told a Planned Parenthood audience that the first thing he would do as President is sign into law the mislabeled Freedom of Choice Act (FOCA). As a new Insight paper from Vice President of Government Affairs Tom McClusky shows, if FOCA were to become law it would overturn hundreds of state laws that have put limits on abortion. Planned Parenthood, NARAL and other pro-abortion groups agree with Tom’s assessment. The ACLU proclaims, “This [FOCA] bill prohibits such restrictions as parental notification and consent, as well as the requirement that all abortions be performed in a hospital, spousal consent, waiting periods …” Recent polls show that most Americans agree there should be more restrictions on abortion and that tax dollars should not go to the life-ending procedure. However, the passage of FOCA would guarantee that more taxpayer dollars pay for abortions. Its sponsors, including Senators Obama, Hillary Clinton (D-N.Y.) and Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.), argue that they want to make abortion rarer. However, when FOCA-like legislation was passed in Maryland that state saw its abortion rate skyrocket, just as the national abortion rate was dropping. Passage of FOCA would be a big payoff to the abortion industry at the deadly cost of citizens’ rights.
UNpatriotic: United Nations Considers Religious Gag Order
Ezra Levant, the international publisher at the center of a controversy over an anti-Mohammed cartoon, made an important stop on Capitol Hill last Friday, along with others who are warning Americans about the gathering storm over free speech rights. The Organization of the Islamic Conference (OIC) is now pushing the U.N. to pass anti-defamation laws that would ultimately be a “declaration of war against… Christianity.” Congressional leaders are trying to determine what, if anything, they can do about it. Under the resolution before the U.N., freedom of expression “would be subject to limitations.” While it has not yet passed, panelists said that it is already having a “chilling effect.” Not only does the OIC hope to protect outrageous “blasphemy laws” in countries like Pakistan, but it also aims to empower politically correct courts and tribunals to criminalize speaking out against Islam. The criterion on which these offenses would be judged is nothing more than hurt feelings. FRC was present at the hearing and we will continue to work with Congress to oppose these assaults on our first freedoms.