Engage Family Minute
The Engaging Essentials
With our upcoming conference, Politics According to the Bible, and other projects in the fire, I’ve been kept away from the Engaging Essentials. But, it’s a periodic feature anyway, right? Here’s some critical stories from the past week.
Marriage and the Seinfeld Effect – An interesting note by Matt Kaufman explaining why there appears to be support for same-sex “marriage” when, in reality, there really isn’t. The whole article – for fans of Seinfeld or not – is really worth reading. Here’s a teaser:
What we’re seeing, the authors say, is what social scientists call the “spiral of silence.” One side’s reluctant to speak up, the other gets increasingly aggressive, and wins by default. The hard core will defend marriage, but they’re increasingly isolated.
Russell More Takes on Glenn Beck – Dr. Russell Moore of the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary provides a much-needed call to evangelicals to return to the Gospel, warning, in the process, that Glenn Beck’s Gospel is not the same. I can’t think of much of anything I disagree with in Dr. Moore’s critique. It’s what he didn’t say that causes me some concern. Look for a post on that later. Incidentally, it is Dr. Moore’s concern that initially motivated our conference next week. Sign up today!
Bullying the Bullied – Candi Cushman of Focus on the Family made an excellent appearance on Anderson Cooper 360 last night. The topic was that of bullying and how same-sex activists are using such laws to press their agenda on our most impressionable. Learn more about Focus’ project at www.TrueTolerance.org. Here’s the vid:
Related posts:
Politics According to the Bible – Registration Ends FRIDAY
Just a friendly reminder to be sure to register for our conference on September 10. Don’t worry, if you have tickets to the Marshall v. WVU game, you’ll have plenty of time to attend the conference from 9-2 and then get to the game at 7:00.
Registration is just $32 and for that fee you will receive:
- Wayne Grudem’s, Politics According to the Bible
- Greg Gilbert’s, What is the Gospel?
- Alan Sears’ novel, In Justice
- Alan Sears and Craig Osten’s, The Homosexual Agenda
Plus, you’ll hear from speakers including Dr. Wayne Grudem, Greg Gilber, Wayne Barnard, and Erik Stanley!
Be sure to visit www.FamilyPolicyWV.com/conference and register today!
Related posts:
Parents Win Rights While Obama Admin Keeps Secrets
By Nathan A. Cherry, 08/31/2010
Parents in Alaska now have to be notified before their underage daughter can have an abortion.
Martinsburg, WV – I couldn’t help but notice the irony in four articles I read back to back…to back to back. All relating to teenage pregnancy and abortion, it’s almost an eerie indication of where we are headed if we don’t push harder to defund death merchant Planned Parenthood. Admittedly I was excited to see how soundly pro-abortion groups lost their fight in Alaska, despite an overwhelming amount of money spent. This brings me to the first article.
Alaska Voters Pass Measure for Parental Notification Before Teen Abortions
According to Lifenews.com the measure passed by a resounding 55 to 44 percent. The new law will require “abortion practitioners to notify a parent of a minor girl 48 hours before performing an abortion on her.” This is certainly refreshing news in the abortion fights. My first thought, however, is that 44 percent of Alaskans, many of them parents no doubt, voted against this measure!? Are there really parents out there that don’t want to know before a doctor performs a potentially damaging, even deadly, procedure on their daughter?
At least one parent in Alaska is grateful for the new law, even if it came too late to save her granddaughter. (Click here to read this heart-wrenching story.)
Commenting on the passage of Measure 2, Joel Davidson of the Catholic Anchor said, “Supporters say the measure will benefit minor girls by involving her parents in a critical moment in her life. They also point to the fact that those who sexually abuse minors will be brought to justice more readily if parents are notified before their minor daughter undergoes an abortion.”
Again, are there really parents in Alaska that don’t want to know when their daughters are being abused, or about to have a life-changing procedure? Well, good for the many concerned parents in Alaska that see the value in being involved and engaged in their daughters’ lives; even during the tough times.
Residents in the UK however are seeing changes of a different nature. They are seeing the teen pregnancy and abortion rates skyrocket. Lifenews.com also carries this headline: British Pro-Life Group Saddened New Figures Show Teen Abortions Up in Wales
How high is too high? Lifenews.com editor Steven Ertelt reports that “figures show just under 60 percent of girls under 16 who become pregnant now have an abortion and 48 percent of girls under 18 do. That’s a rise from the 50 percent and 40 percent figures from one year ago for each category.”
With these shocking numbers, are lawmakers in the UK preparing to combat the rise with abstinence education and stricter abortion laws? Of course not, that would make too much sense. They are doing what all good liberal governments do, compounding the problem by pushing deficient policies. In fact, it’s reported that “the Assembly Government will soon push its Sexual Health and Wellbeing Action Plan for Wales 2010-2015 even though abortion rates are rising with the promotion of birth control.”
Paul Tully of the pro-life group SPUC said, “The figures also challenge the idea that women are freely deciding to have abortions. Teenage girls have been targeted by pro-abortion policies in recent years. Teenage girls are under increasing pressure firstly to become sexually active despite lacking the usual support needed to bear a child, and secondly to undergo abortions rather than give birth.”
This is a shocking admission, and unfortunately is most likely true. But what possible reason would cause a group and the government to pressure young girls to become sexually active before they are ready and then to choose abortion? There is only one logical answer: money.
Pro-abortion groups like Planned Parenthood and Marie Stopes funnel millions of dollars into candidates’ pockets each year. They death merchants and candidates don’t care at all for the young girls they are hurting or for the babies they are helping to kill. They simply care for their own bank accounts. Their bloody hands and bloody bank accounts have corrupted our innocent daughters, our families, and our society.
In light of these events I can’t help but wonder why the Obama administration sought to keep secret the outcome of a taxpayer- funded study on abstinence education. Considering that the administration has done all it can to defund abstinence education completely, it makes sense that they would not want the results of this study released to the public. Here are some of the preliminary results:
“70 percent of parents agreed with the statement: ‘It is against your values for your adolescents to have sexual intercourse before marriage.’
“70 percent of parents agreed with the statement: ‘Having sexual intercourse is something only married people should do.’
“Adolescents had similar responses for the two questions.”
Well, thankfully enough people complained that HHS finally released the study findings only to have their website jammed by the number of visitors interested in the results. The results were then posted online.
You really have to wonder about the mental capacity of lawmakers that would willingly place millions of students in harm’s way for political gain. When they turn a blind eye to the overwhelming success of abstinence education and the desires of parents to have it offered, I question their motives. But, if parents continue to pressure lawmakers to do what is in the best interest of kids we will continue to see victories like the Measure 2 in Alaska.
Related posts:
Will Values Voter’s Prevail in the WV Senate Race?
Democratic nominee for U.S. Senate, Joe Manchin (Credit: associated press)
GOP Nominee, John Raese (Credit: Raese for Senate Campaign)
Over the weekend, 12% of West Virginia’s registered voters cast their ballots in the special election for the United States Senate. This primary election yielded nominations for Gov. Joe Manchin, for the Democratic Party, and John Raese, for the Republican Party. Oh, and for good measure, Mountain Party candidate Jesse Johnson was nominated too.
So, what’s the fallout? Rasmussen reports that the race is quite tight. In fact, it has pushed at least one political reporter to requalify this race from “solid democrat” to “leaning democrat”. From Rassmussen:
In the first Rasmussen Reports post-primary survey of West Virginia’s U.S. Senate race, Democratic Governor Joe Manchin attracts 48% of the vote while Republican businessman John Raese earns 42%.
via Election 2010: West Virginia Senate Special Election – Rasmussen Reports™.
That 6% gap is remarkable in and of itself, but check this out from the same story:
Just after state legislators officially approved a special Senate election this year to replace the late Robert Byrd, Manchin led Raese by a 51% to 35% margin.
via Election 2010: West Virginia Senate Special Election – Rasmussen Reports™.
When was that 16% margin reported? Try July 23, 2010. Yep, 10% points and the official, general election campaign has not even started. Whoa!
So, what are we to make of all this? Why the shift? More importantly, what does it mean for November. There are at least three ways to slice an answer to those questions.
First, Joe Manchin is under investigation. Sure, the people of West Virginia are “investigating” who to vote for, but that’s not what I mean. The FBI, IRS, and other people who where their corporate initials on the back of their windbreakers are investigating the governor, his staff, and parts of his administration. Here’s how the Washington Examiner put it last week:
West Virginia Democratic Gov. Joe Manchin, who built his own bridge to nowhere over the Shenandoah River eight miles north of Harpers Ferry, is currently running for the seat left vacant by the death of another world-class porkmeister, Democratic Sen. Robert C. Byrd.
Byrd, the one-time Ku Klux Klansman, was later dubbed the “King of Pork” by Citizens Against Government Waste for helping to secure more than $1 billion in pork that somehow never managed to trickle down to the average citizen. Of West Virginias 55 counties, 52 have not seen any economic growth since World War II.
Manchin’s $153 million bridge is 140 feet wide and as high as the Washington Monument, but it dead-ends at the state line in a 22-foot-wide, two-lane country road that the Virginia Department of Transportation has already determined will never be widened.
The governor’s experience in pushing through this useless political boondoggle in an impoverished state where 39 percent of existing bridges are functionally obsolete will no doubt be useful preparation for the Senate, where wasteful pork projects and back-room deals are the norm rather than the exception.
An ongoing federal investigation into bid-rigging for work done in the governors office and State Capitol in 2005 has already ensnared Charleston businessman Clark Diehl, who will be sentenced on Friday. Diehl pleaded guilty in January to income tax evasion and mail fraud for bypassing the states competitive bidding process.
Yee-ouch! How this investigation plays out, if at all, does not really matter. Just ask outgoing Congressman Al Mollohan. Mere fireless smoke may be sufficient to flip this seat. Maybe.
Second, President Obama is President. Ok, not real shocker there, right, but this race will be John Raese v. Barack Obama. It’s a proxy battle that Joe Manchin probably would like to avoid, but won’t be able to do so. And that’s not just for Republicans to fight. There are a mess of Democratic voters in West Virginia that are still wincing from Manchin’s endorsement of Obama, when West Virginia voters nominated Hillary Clinton! In short, Manchin lost quite a few friends with that endorsement.
Finally, the pivotal question is which way the values voters in the State of West Virginia will vote. Though heavily Democratic in terms of voter registration, the people of West Virginia are a conservative people. Ask the average voter what they think of Joe Manchin and part of their answer is likely to be, “Well, he’s for coal and he’s pro-life.” But, we have to wonder about his commitment to both. I’ll let our friends at the Coal Association answer any questions about his commitment to coal, but I will note here that we are the 35th most pro-life state in the Union. In the time since Joe Manchin has been governor, I can think of only 2 pro-life bills – bills watered down at that – that have been signed into law by the governor. Add that to Manchin’s endorsement of Obamacare and those aren’t overwhelming credentials I’d like to have on my side.
Of course, the issue of marriage can hang over the head of Joe Manchin too. It’s clear that the need for an amendment that defines marriage as one man and one woman is going to make its way to the Federal level. West Virginians overwhelmingly support that definition – more than 3/4’s! They question Manchin must answer before I can personally get behind him is what has he done on the state level that leads me to believe he’ll be supportive of an amendment to the U.S. Constitution to define marriage as one man and one woman?
That answer is not much.
Earlier this year, we collected more than 6,230 petitions that said that letting voters settle the legal definition of marriage will be a decisive factor for them on Election Day. In 2009, more than 150 churches throughout the state participated in “Stand4Marriage Sunday” organized by the FPCWV. Prior to that, in the fall of 2008,124 pastors signed onto an open letter to Governor Manchin urging his action in defense of marriage. In each instance, Gov. Manchin has sat in total silence. He has simply refused to act.
As former senator Zell Miller once put it, when it comes to culture shaping issues like these, “Silence isn’t golden, it’s yellow.”
Over the next 9 weeks and 1 day, this election may be decided on multiple fronts. Of course, the news now is about Manchin. Whether Raese will be a friend to supporters of life, marriage, and religious freedom is for him to convince us of as well.
Regardless, the most key factor for this election is that of the values voter whose potential has not yet been realized – or even effectively tapped – in West Virginia. We are working on a plan to identify and motivate more than 100,000 values voters to the polls on election day. You can invest in that effort here.
Related posts:
Judge Protects Life by Blocking ESC Research
By Nathan A. Cherry, 08/30/2010
Using Embryonic Stem Cells for research destroys a human being.
Martinsburg, WV – The Obama administration is being met with opposition for nearly everything it does. From the massive bailout of the auto and banking industries, to the confusing plan in Afghanistan, President Obama is finding fewer supporters – even among his own party. Now he can add Embryonic Stem Cell (ESC) research to the list.
Last week a judge ordered a halt to President Obama’s executive order for taxpayer-funded ESC research saying it violated a 1996 federal law prohibiting “the use of federal funds for stem cell research, regardless of whether the stage of research directly involves the destruction of an embryo.”
The article below by Politico.com details the injunction issued last week by Judge Royce Lamberth.
No Fed Cash for Stem Cell Research
A federal judge on Monday issued a temporary ban on federal funding for embryonic stem cell research, sidetracking President Barack Obama’s executive order that had expanded federal funding for human stem cell research last year.
U.S. District Court Judge Royce Lamberth ruled that the order, which Obama signed in March 2009, violated a federal law that prohibits the use of federal funds for research practices that result in the destruction of a human embryo. According to the ruling, the Dickey-Wicker Amendment, which Congress passed in 1996, clearly prohibits the use of federal funds for stem cell research, regardless of whether the stage of research directly involves the destruction of an embryo.
The judge also ruled that two adult stem cell researchers, Theresa Deisher of AVM Biotechnology and James Sherley of the Boston Biomedical Research Institute — among several parties who objected to the order in court — had the authority to sue the government. Lamberth had initially denied their request, but the case was sent back to his court on appeal.
“The language of the statute reflects the unambiguous intent of Congress to enact a broad prohibition of funding research in which a human embryo is destroyed,” Lamberth wrote in the decision. “This prohibition encompasses all research in which an embryo is destroyed, not just the ‘piece of research’ in which the embryo is destroyed.”
Advocates believe that embryonic stem cells, which can be manipulated to mimic other cells in the body, could lead to significant breakthroughs in the treatment of debilitating conditions or life-threatening diseases, including quadriplegia and Parkinson’s disease. Opponents say the research is unethical and depends on the taking of a fertilized embryo, which abortion opponents consider a viable human life. They also argue that scientists have found other adult cells that can be used for the research.
(Read the rest of the story here)
I reported on the waste that ESC is compared to Adult Stem Cell research. To date ESC has done absolutely nothing and helped no one; while Adult Stem Cell research has helped thousands. So it seems appropriate for a number of reasons that a judge would block federally funding of useless research. And even though the Obama administration still doesn’t get it, and plans to try and move forward I hope that we continue to see research done that is useful, has thousands of cases with positive results, and protects human life.
Related posts:
The Engaging Essentials
DADT Repeal Creates No-Win Situation for Chaplains – Father Alexander F.C. Wilson, a former military chaplain, writes in Stars and Stripes against the normalization of homosexual behavior in the military. Here’s a snip,
The pragmatic arguments against the president’s proposal concerning unit morale, cohesion and readiness are well-known. Not so the following slippery slope. A “nondiscrimination” policy would surely mutate into approval and celebration of the “gay” lifestyle, followed by “affirmative action” recruitment of homosexuals, politically correct ideological indoctrination throughout the armed forces including family members, and, finally, active discrimination against — and persecution of — those who dare to express a dissenting opinion.
More Mehlman Fallout – Three stories following former GOP Chairman Ken Mehlman’s announcement that he is now living a homosexual lifestyle and advocating for the redefintion of marriage by any means necessary. What are your thoughts on Mehlman?
- WaPo Flat Wrong – Jordan Lorence of the Alliance Defense Fund reveals some background exposing why the Washington Post, and by extension Mehlman, is wrong to suggest Bush/Rove orchestrated the 04 and 06 marriage amendment in 30-ish states. It was not Rove, argues Lorence correctly, but grassroots advocates sick of judicial tyranny and intolerant efforts to redefine marriage that only tangentially benefitted the GOP.
- Tony Perkins Response – My friend Tony Perkins at the Family Research Council offers a brief word of warning to the GOP as a reminder to them to not forsake social conservatives.
- The Kens Predict Potential Disaster for the GOP – I am an independent partly because I am weary of the weak commitment to the social conservative values I view as essential for the stability of our families and nation. I choose to vote for candidates of any party that clearly stand for life, marriage, and religious freedom – and against those who don’t. Ken Blackwell and Ken Klukowski of the Family Research Council offer a stern warning to the GOP: As the last party with a platform stating a commitment to social conservative values, if you want to avoid a party split, don’t abandon marriage as one man and one woman. Here’s a clip, really the crux of their argument:
Social conservatives cannot be played as fools by the Republican Party. They are not “useful idiots.” If Republican leaders abandon social conservatives and the party platform, then they will face the same kind of disaster they could be facing if Tea Partiers abandon the GOP. — Millions of social conservatives will either stay home, or will vote for a third-party candidate who takes up the mantle of marriage, life, faith and family.
It Works! – School choice proving effective 10 years on in Florida. Do you think it could work in WV?
Who’s My Daddy? – A rather sad and shocking article about the unregulated business of sperm donation. As a word of warning, use discernment in choosing to read this article. It is a tad on the graphic side, in a medical sort of way. I can’t help but be saddened, as a Dad myself, that men are choosing to be callously separated from their children. What do you think?
Related posts:
Pray for Pastor Richard Mahan
Rev. Richard Mahan refuses to waiver in his commitment to Scripture. (Photo Source: The Associated Press)
If you have spent 12 seconds with my good friend Richard Mahan, you have been encouraged by his joy and challenge by his commitment to sacred Scripture.
As the Charleston Gazette reports via the Associated Press, Pastor Mahan is again making news for his unflinching commitment to Scripture. Please read the whole story and add Pastor Mahan and the St. Timothy Lutheran Church congregation to your prayers:
Richard Mahan and Anita Hill are both Lutheran pastors who were inside a Minneapolis convention hall last summer when delegates for the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America voted to allow non-celibate gay and lesbian pastors.
Afterward, each cried for different reasons.
Mahan, lead pastor at St. Timothy Lutheran in Charleston, W.Va., said he cried because he realized he would likely leave the denomination in which he had invested 42 years of ministry. For Hill, the openly gay lead pastor at St. Paul-Reformation Lutheran in St. Paul, they were tears of “joy and relief.”
A year later, the ELCA is moving gay pastors into its fold — it's now the largest Protestant denomination in the U.S. to allow noncelibate gays into its ranks — even as the most visible dissidents strike out on their own.
Mahan and other critics of the decision plan to gather this week in Columbus, Ohio, for another Lutheran convention. Leaders of 18 former ELCA churches are expected to be among more than 1,000 Lutherans voting Friday to create a brand new Lutheran denomination that they claim will follow the Scriptures more faithfully: the North American Lutheran Church.
Related posts:
The Engaging Essentials
Colson on Summer for Marriage Tour – Chuck Colson reflects on the recent summer for marriage tour sponsored by the National Organization for Marriage.
GOP Not Always Right – Stories like these confirm why we are a nonpartisan policy and advocacy organization. We have friends and detractors in both major political parties and continue to press both parties to demonstrate their commitment to the truly conservative values of life, marriage, and religious liberty.
Is Your Doc an Athiest? – Might be worth asking. Your life may depend on it.
Homosexual Eugenics – It’s easy to claim there is no ‘gay gene,’ but that hardly ends the debate. As Exodus International points out, whether homosexual behavior is a genetically driven orientation is an irrelevant question. I urge you to inform yourself on this critically important point.
APA Considers Sex Orientation Change – An important update from Family News in Focus.
Bonus Video – Kristin Tremba’s powerful testimony on the impossibility of squaring homosexual behavior with conformity to Christ:
Living Water: Labels from The Well on Vimeo.
Related posts:
Interview: Glenn Stanton Explains Why Kids are Not All Right in Same Sex Homes
Glenn Stanton discusses why mothers and fathers are critical in the rearing of children
By Nathan A. Cherry, 08/25/2010
Martinsburg, WV – At the risk of being called lazy I am going to post an entire article below. I am doing so because this article is worth reading for anyone that has been following the debate over traditional homes vs. homosexual homes. Some would say there is no difference and that the traditional roles of mother and father are antiquated and unnecessary. I would challenge that thought. But I will let this article speak for itself.
Glenn Stanton is no slouch. He has done his homework and speaks with knowledge, credibility, and most importantly, truth. This is well worth reading:
Glenn Stanton Explains That Mothers and Fathers Aren’t ‘Optional’
Glenn T. Stanton, director for family formation studies at Focus on the Family, debates and lectures extensively on the issues of gender, sexuality, marriage and parenting at universities and churches around the country.
Stanton just finished his fourth book, “Secure Daughters, Confident Sons: How Parents Guide Their Children into Authentic Masculinity and Femininity” (Waterbrook, 2011).
1. You recently unpacked the myth that mothers and fathers are “optional” – as glamorized in the new Hollywood movie, “The Kids are All Right.” Please explain for our readers what you found in your research and the importance of reliable research.
First of all, my research is from a sociological and anthropological perspective, asking questions such as, “What does the data say, in terms of family form?” “What does data reveal about a child’s need for a mother and a father?” “Does a mom and dad matter for the family?” and “Do husbands and wives matter for marriage?”
So, when two major studies were published this year in good academic journals, naturally I was interested.
However, what I found was truly troubling. Not only was the research skewed, it went as far as to claim that lesbian-led homes; they said that they are better.
This is just remarkable and discouraging, because they are not basing their conclusions and understandings on good science. It’s all about political and social pressure, which should have no place in this discussion.
Typically, when you find science saying things that are contrary to what is commonly know and understood (e.g., mothers and fathers matter), you need only to dig into that research to find significant methodological problems with their findings.
We see this quite often –research like that being skewed or results being buried.
Are we to think then, that we have been disadvantaging children by raising them with mothers and fathers?
We know that this is absolutely not the case.
One serious methodological problem was that they used remarkable small, nonrepresentative research samples collected primarily by the scholars themselves. Rather, they should have performed a nationally representive study.
Sociologists have commented that there is just no way that you can derive reliable conclusions with studies that use these types of “snowball samples.”
Furthermore, these faulty studies that tout that children are fine with two lesbian moms are sending clear messages to dads that they aren’t essential for the family.
One of these studies, published in the Journal of Marriage and Family, simply had lesbian moms self-reporting on how their kids were doing. Naturally, these moms would be inclined to say, “Our kids are just great.”
An example of that: One of these studies even claimed that when the lesbian relationships break up, the kids showed no adverse effect whatsoever.
2. We are witnessing medical bodies from the American Medical Association (AMA) to the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) being heavily influenced by the homosexual agenda and by political pressure. How does this affect public policy and the lives of average Americans?
People initially think, “Well, gosh, these people are doctors. They should really know the answers.”
But, here’s a real-world example of policy influencing the personal: A parent seeks advice from their pediatrician, who relies on faulty research published by organizations like the AMA or AAP, which might be influenced by gay activists from within or outside the organizations.
These organizations are essentially turning a blind eye to the rigorous methodology that should be there, simply because of social engineering being pushed by these activists.
Thus, good science is not being done.
On top of that, doctors face the reality of a full patient schedule and numerous demands on their time. So, it’s easy to fall into the pattern of taking another doctor’s word for it. I see this all the time.
In fact, I ask doctors who speak authoritatively on same-sex studies, “Have you read the studies?” They typically respond with, “No, I haven’t read all of it –but I have read the press release.”
Well, that’s science – or policy-making – by press release. I am afraid our sound-bite culture has influenced medicine.
3. To that end, it is troubling to realize how powerful these studies can be in influencing our public policy – and how they contribute to the systematic redefinition of marriage and the family. As you study family formation, how are you seeing it influence culture?
California immediately comes to mind.
Gay activists lost the California marriage amendment in 2008, because of parents’ concern about children. Now, we have these “studies” that attempt to address those concerns. It’s no coincidence.
These activists want to redefine the norms of society – and of the family.
However, nature declares that mothers and fathers are important. That is why all cultures at all times involve mothers and fathers in the raising of children.
It is not because the “religious right” went everywhere and demanded and forced that on cultures. It is nature that demands it.
So, when silly studies like this come up that say mothers and fathers aren’t essential for teaching their children sexual values, most Americans don’t buy it.
4. What do you say to parents whose child is struggling with same-sex attraction?
I encourage mothers and fathers to be attuned to their child and guide them into healthy feminine and masculine directions – and to do that in an intentional way.
It sounds simplistic; most people who have never been something before, need help and guidance into that role.
Yes, there are children who grow up with gender confusion. But, in these situations, parents should be very directive in helping them understand the gender distinction between mothers and fathers.
All the research shows that the most influential people in the lives of young people are their parents.
Fathers will never shame or scold their boys into masculinity. They need to invite their boys into masculinity.
Mothers, on the other hand, need to push their boys “off the dime,” if you will, of overly feminine behavior toward masculinity.
Girls need to have the healthy femininity drawn out of them by a healthy, good, strong relationship with Dad. Dads really do matter in affirming a girl’s healthy sense of femininity.
5. What resources are available to parents and decision-makers who want more information to help them counter this culture shift?
This is actually why I wrote “Secure Daughters, Confident Sons.” It will be available in January, but parents can preorder it online.
In the interim, I have a paper “Are the Kids All Right?” which was written with the desire to educate, encourage and bolster parents.
I want them to know the correct research for themselves and confidently know that research that says gender makes no difference in the parenting outcome of children is completely unreliable.
And now that children are back to school, parents will find this especially helpful, as we see more and more school board and administrators use faulty research to bring in controversial – and unbiblical–sex-ed curriculum.
Read the original post here.
Related posts:
The Engaging Essentials
Abstinence Study Released – Sometime last week, we advised you of HHS’ intent to hide a study on the importance of abstinence. Citizenlink now reports that, due to your calls and emails, HHS has relented and is releasing this critical data.
Know Your Rights – As kids head back to schools, we are encouraging parents and students to familiarize yourselves with what is covered by the First Amendment in regards to religious expression within the public school system. The Alliance Defense Fund provides very helpful guidance (scroll to bottom for PDF brochures).
Homeschooling Growing Fast – For those of you for which the above is inapplicable, maybe it’s because you’re among the fastest segment of education in America today: homeschooling.
Top Marine: We Don’t Want Gay Roomates – Stinging words from the top US Marines re: the repeal of DADT, “I can tell you that an overwhelming majority would like not to be roomed with a person who is openly homosexual,”
How to Repeal the First Amendment – David French explains in his typically fresh way. Nondiscrimination just isn’t what it used to be anymore.
Stem Cell Plan Blocked – A Federal judge has blocked the implementation of President Obama’s embryonic stem cell research funding plan. Tough to understand the issues, but this is an important pro-life victory. For more reading on this decision, along with links to more in-depth study of the issue, visit Justin Taylor’s blog today.
Virginia Imposes Tough Regulations on Abortion Mills – Virginia AG Ken Cuccinelli has issued an opinion that permits the state to have greater oversight over the abortion industry in Virginia. In other news, pre-born children in Virginia were seen breathing a sigh of relief.
Here We Go Again – Wyoming couple sues to challenge Wyoming law limiting marriage to one man and one woman. Interestingly, Wyoming does not have an official Defense of Marriage Act, but it does have a statute defining marriage as a “civil contract” that if formed “between a male and a female person.” West Virginians should watch this case with interest. Similar logic could challenge WV’s DOMA, such as it is.
CA Gubernatorial Candidate Supports Prop 8 Appeal – Candidate for governor of California, Meg Whitman, says she would give standing to the proponents of Prop 8 to appeal Judge Walker’s decision from last month. Not what I’d call an overwhelming endorsement of the people’s right of self-determination, but, then again, it is California.
Related posts:
Allen Hunt at Townhall: Polygamy is Just as Valid is Homosexual “Marriage”
By Nathan A. Cherry, 08/24/2010
Martinsburg, WV – I don’t generally have a desire to stand up and cheer after reading an article. But this article by Townhall columnist Allen Hunt deserves three cheers and an encore.
Hunt’s article Polygamy: The New Growth Stock is spot on in it’s estimation of the implications of Judge Walker’s ruling in the Prop. 8 case. Hunt rightly concludes that if homosexual “marriage” is legalized the logical next step is to legalize polygamy. He further asserts that polygamy achieves logical goals for marriage that are impossible for same-sex “marriage.” His deductions are more than accurate, they are logical if we start down the slippery road of redefining marriage.
I would be remiss if I didn’t highlight several key points in Hunt’s article.
Commenting on the “plight” of a young woman who has found a “loving, committed relationship” Hunt says:
“My first thought: if ‘homosexual marriage’ is acceptable, on what basis could one possibly say that this woman’s innovative ‘marriage’ is not? If (as the Rev. Walker has now issued forth in his judicial ruling this week) marriage is a civil right and marriage is to be defined by an individual person, this 25 year old young woman needs to file a lawsuit seeking recognition of her special union too. She is in a hopelessly disadvantaged state. Her participation in that three-way relationship offers her no legal status as a married person, affords her no tax benefits, and leaves her in an inferior state. She has no claims on the children for whom she cares in that marriage relationship. This young woman is a second-class citizen.”
He’s absolutely right. If the definition of marriage can be expanded to include homosexuals there is no legitimate reason to exclude polygamists as well. For that matter, there can be no legitimate reason to exclude any person, groups of persons, or union of any kind.
Hunt makes another valid point in the benefits to children that polygamy affords over homosexual “marriage,” in saying:
“In addition, polygamy affords children the opportunity to be influenced by their own mother and father, another gift that ‘homosexual marriage’ inherently cannot offer given its intrinsic barrenness. It seems most moral that children have a right not only to know who their parents are but to know each of them as fully as possible, a right not possible in ‘homosexual marriage,’ but fully real in polygamy.”
There is no denying that homosexual “marriage” places children at a disadvantage. Children were designed to grow and thrive best in a home with two biological parents of opposite sex. Homosexual “marriage” not only deprives children of a mother or a father, it deprives them the opportunity to two biological parents.
Perhaps the finest point Hunt makes is regarding Judge Walkers misguided and naïve assertion that marriage has nothing to do with morality.
“Worse still, The Very Reverend Vaughn Walker seized on this individualistic notion of marriage rights to cap his career as one of two openly homosexual federal judges. In all caps, in the middle of his opinion, he wrote in all caps, ‘A PRIVATE MORAL VIEW THAT SAME-SEX COUPLES ARE INFERIOR TO OPPOSITE-SEX COUPLES IS NOT A PROPER BASIS FOR LEGISLATION…’ Somehow, Rev. Walker misses the point that there is no such thing as having no moral view. He merely replaced one moral view with his own with his insistence that California’s obligation is to treat its citizens equally, not to ‘mandate [its] own moral code.’ His lack of self-awareness and critical thinking is appalling. There simply is no such thing as moral-free thinking or legislating. The question is which moral system will you use not whether you will use one at all. Rev. Walker merely enshrined his own.”
This fact is undeniable. Marriage is in fact inseparably linked to morality. Perhaps it is a secular morality. Maybe it’s an atheistic morality. Or, it just might be a religious morality that finds its roots in the traditional, historical definition of marriage. Regardless of which morality one chooses to bring into the debate it is impossible to exclude it; it plays the central role in every persons perspective of this foundational institute of society. (Read Allen Hunt’s article in it’s entirety here)
Related posts:
The Engaging Essentials
White House Blocking Abstinence Study? – A recent study by the Administration for Children and Families confirms that a supermajority of American parents (and their children) support delaying sexual activity until marriage. But, the report has not been made public. Why? Follow the link.
‘Week After’ Pill Approved – Preborn children who have managed to make it past the ‘morning after’ pill, now find themselves vulnerable to the recently approved, “Ella” medication. What does the marketing-research named drug do? According to AUL, “It can either prevent a developing human embryo from implanting in the uterus, or it can kill an implanted embryo by starving it to death.” By the way, a “human embryo” is a human in its earliest form. May God have mercy on us.
Why Conservatives are Abandoning the ‘gay’ issue – Insightful comments that Hoppy Kercheval might consider reading.
Making Gender Irrelevant – Dennis Prager echos what I’ve been asking same-sex activists all along, “Which parent doesn’t matter? Mom or Dad?”
Why Just Two? – Following Prager’s piece really has to be David Mills’ piece over at the First Things blog, First Thoughts. Logic people. It’s simple logic.
Ed Meese on Prop. 8 Trial – Former Attorney General Edwin Meese III checks in on the failure of Judge Walker to consider – let alone apply – the binding Supreme Court precedent of Baker v. Nelson.
Related posts:
UN Treaty Would Strip Parental Rights in America
By Nathan A. Cherry, 08/
A UN Treaty could remove your right to teach religious beliefs to your kids.
Martinsburg, WV – As if parental rights are not under constant attack already, a great threat to the desires and wishes of parents in raising their children is looming. As Citizenlink.com (a division of Focus on the Family) reports, “U.S. senators are under pressure to ratify a U.N. treaty that could give government the last word on parenting decisions.”
At the center of this firestorm is the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child (UNCRC). This treaty gives “the government the power to override decisions of good parents when their choices differ from the paths favored by the progressive Left.”
More specifically, parental rights concerning the “ability to direct their children’s spiritual upbringing, as well as what – and when – they learn about sexuality” would all be in danger. As if teen sex, pregnancy, and spiritual matters are better left in the hands of the government.
This is just another obvious example of the radical left’s attempt to undermine parents that intend to raise their children with the strong conservative values that help shape America. This can be described as nothing more than political game-play with the welfare of our children intended to brainwash them into being political pawns.
However, thankfully, Sen. Jim DeMint (R-S.C.) has offered a resolution (S.R. 519) to defeat adoption of the UN treaty and preserve parental rights. Sen. DeMint believes that the UN treaty “undermines traditional principles of law in the United States, regarding parents and children,” and offers an example in which “the United Kingdom was found to be in violation of the Convention … for allowing parents to exercise a right to opt their children out of sex education courses in the public schools, without a prior government review of the wishes of the child.”
The bottom line is that neither the government nor children themselves know what is best for kids in raising them. That responsibility belongs to good parents that seek the best for their children. (The full article can be viewed here.)
The Citizenlink Action Center offers quick and easy methods of contacting your Senators to ask them to help defeat adoption of this terrible UN Treaty. Sen. DeMint has 30 co-sponsors for S.R. 519 and needs just 34 total to defeat the treaty. Take action today.
Related posts:
The Engaging Essentials
Stay Imposed on Walker – The 9th Circuit, working quickly, has granted the stay requested by proponents of Proposition 8, putting it on the fast track for arguments in December. You might also find NOM’s review of the brief requesting this stay.
To End All Marriage – Alan Sears goes, “Inside the Issues” to explain the future intent of Walker’s decision.
Ground Zero Mosque – Confused about what everyone is talking about regarding a proposed Mosque at ‘Ground Zero’ in Manhattan? Here’s a Q&A on the background.
Pay Up – Planned Parenthood in New Jersey is coming under fire, but this time it’s in the front office. Federal Audits have revealed that the nation’s leader in abortion services has improperly billed Medicaid for reimbursement of their nefarious services. How much? To the tune of $3,000,000! Shouldn’t bee too much to pay for the $1 billion-a-year company that reports profits of $85 million from killing pre-born children.
Weddings Down in Mass. – A report out of the Bay State says that the overall number of marriages have dropped since the year 2000. While the story leads with the rationale that more marriages are being performed in destination weddings, it also admits that marriages, in general – among catholics and protestants, are dropping in the Massachusetts. Of course, this is not a surprise to those of us who have warned that redefining marriage, as Massachusetts has done, will result in an overall weakening of marriage.
What’s Next? – Following the decision to redefine marriage in California, conservative Christians are seeing more at risk than progressive liberalism. Frankly, it’s the stuff novels are made of!
Related posts:
Understanding Homosexual “Marriage” in Light of the Prop. 8 Ruling
By Nathan A. Cherry, 08/17/2010
Judge Walker ruled last week that the votes of over 7 million Californians was "unconstitutional."
Martinsburg, WV – The recent ruling in the Prop. 8 trials have people across the United States wondering what is going to happen to marriage. Though the case is far from over, the implications of its outcome are potentially historic.
In light of these events a story by Matthew Cullinan Hoffman at LifeSiteNews.com is particularly relevant at this time. This well written piece highlights the culture of “marriage” within the homosexual community and its complete antithesis to traditional marriage. The following excerpts shed light on the secrets homosexuals are trying to keep in the closet.
“Forty-seven percent of gay couples in a recently published study said that they had ‘sex agreements’ with their partners, which clarify how often and in what circumstances they are permitted to have sex with others. Only 45% said that their relationships were monogamous, while another 8% disagreed about whether their relationship was ‘open’ or exclusive…”
If nearly half of homosexuals have no intention of engaging in a monogamous relationship, why exactly are they pushing for “marriage” rights?
“With straight people, it’s called affairs or cheating…but with gay people it does not have such negative connotations.”
In other words, even the idea of a monogamous relationship within the homosexual community is a past tradition that bears no weight. So this group not only wants full “marriage” rights and recognition, they want to be able to marry one person while continuing to have sex with as many others as they like. This sounds an awful lot like a polygamous or polyamorous relationship to me. It, in fact, looks nothing at all like traditional marriage.
“Anal intercourse and other forms of homosexual behavior are associated with a variety of diseases and syndromes, including high rates of sexually transmitted diseases such AIDS, syphilis, and hepatitis, which homosexuals suffer at rates many times higher than the general population. It is also associated with damaged rectum linings and a variety of anal and intestinal diseases…”
Why exactly are people seeking to affirm a lifestyle that has been proven time and again, scientifically, to be the source of disease? How is it rational or responsible to push anyone toward a lifestyle that will, most likely, be the cause of their death?
“The New York Times, writing about the study in January, before its release, noted that the study tends to vindicate those who have warned that homosexual ‘marriage’ will lead to a redefinition of the institution itself, destroying its traditional meaning…Noting that ‘gay nuptials are portrayed by opponents as an effort to rewrite the traditional rules of matrimony…quietly, outside of the news media and courtroom spotlight, many gay couples are doing just that.’ The Times also noted that the homosexuals they tried to interview were worried about what would happen to the gay ‘marriage’ movement if the truth were known about homosexual behavior.”
Deception regarding the homosexual agenda and lifestyle by activists, liberals and lawmakers is astounding. It’s not about health benefits or any other benefits or civil unions would be enough. And, based on this and other studies, it’s not about the right to marry either; considering the lack of commitment or interest in monogamous relationships.
To put it bluntly, this is about eradicating a millennia-old foundational institution of society and forcing every person to abandon their personal convictions to affirm the homosexual lifestyle. It’s about reeducating (aka brainwashing) our children into believing that homosexuality is “normal.” It’s just another step in removing the foundational religious beliefs and heritage of people and forcing them to accept what they believe is morally wrong.
No. Cases like Prop. 8 and legislation like DOMA and DADT are not merely about marriage. They are about radically and permanently altering the political, cultural, and religious landscape. They are a Pandora’s Box leading to an inevitable moral decay that will forever change this country and the world.
Related posts: