Millennials rethink abortion for good reasons

From the files of Jeff Jacoby at The Boston Globe

A Gallup Poll last month found that 50 percent of Americans identified themselves as "pro-choice" on abortion, surpassing the 44% who called themselves "pro-life." It was the first time in seven years that the pro-choice label was more popular — as recently as 2012, Gallup was reporting that the share of self-described "pro-choice" Americans had dipped to an all-time low of 41 percent.

Whatever Americans may call themselves, however, fewer and fewer are getting abortions.

From the Associated Press this week came word that abortion rates are plunging in almost every state, in many cases by more than a fifth since 2010. "Abortions have declined in states where new laws make it harder to have them," the AP's David Crary wrote, "but they've also waned in states where abortion rights are protected."

Indeed, some of the steepest drops occurred in five states that have imposed no restrictions on abortion clinics in recent years — Hawaii (where abortions have shrunk by 30 percent), New Mexico (24 percent), Nevada and Rhode Island (22 percent), and Connecticut (21 percent). Health departments in 45 states supplied the AP with abortion data. In only two of those states, Michigan and Louisiana, were abortions up over the past five years.

This is only the latest report to confirm a marked decline in US abortion rates. The Guttmacher Institute, a pro-abortion-rights research group, published a study last year showing that both the number and frequency of abortions have been decreasing, gradually but steadily, for nearly 25 years. The Centers for Disease Control, using a different methodology, came to a similar conclusion: "Legal induced abortions ... reached historic lows."

Pro-choice activists claim that abortions are down because contraceptive use is up. In an interview with the Associated Press, Judy Tabar, the CEO of Planned Parenthood of Southern New England, attributed the lower abortion rates to the "free" birth control provided under Obamacare. But that's implausible. Abortion rates have been retreating for decades, while the rate of unplanned pregnancies in the United States, a little less than 50 percent, has barely budged since the 1980s.

The drop in the teen abortion rate has been especially dramatic; it fell by more than 66 percent from its peak in 1988. In part, that is a function of fewer teenagers getting pregnant: the teen pregnancy rate plummeted by a stunning 51 percent between 1990 and 2010. But there has also been an empathy-driven reaction against abortion among the generation of Americans that grew up in a world of vivid ultrasound images, and among the miracles of neonatal medicine that now make it possible even for babies born extremely prematurely to survive and flourish.

Millennials have also grown up amid the grim images of abortion and its aftermath. For many, the willful destruction of life in the womb seems less an act of "reproductive freedom" than an act of violence against an innocent victim. All of them know someone who has had a legal abortion; they need only look in a mirror to see someone else who could have been lawfully aborted.

It has been a long time since Roe v. Wade legalized abortion in every state, and, in the companion case of Doe v. Bolton , effectively proclaimed a right to destroy an unborn baby at any stage of pregnancy. But making abortion lawful didn't make it right. Even after all these years, Americans tend to regard most abortions as ignoble. According to Gallup, only 38 percent of US adults generally see abortion as morally acceptable. Other surveys concur. The Pew Research Center found in 2013 that 49 percent of Americans believe that having an abortion is morally wrong, far outnumbering those who regard abortion as morally acceptable (15 percent) or not a moral issue (23 percent).

Young Americans — voters under 30 — were once the most gung-ho in support of unfettered legal abortion. In 1991, fully 36 percent believed abortion should be legal under any circumstances. But by 2010, 18-to-29-year-olds had become more pro-life than their parents — only 24 percent still wanted to keep abortion legal in all cases. More than any other age cohort, in fact, young adults are now the most likely to think abortion should be illegal in all circumstances.

In a sense, every American born since 1973 is a survivor of Roe . Perhaps that explains why, however young people might label themselves, abortion is a choice so few of them are prepared to take.

_____________________________

Become a Truth Serum Partner Now

Stupefying generations of Americans

From the Warning Signs of Alan Caruba at Facts-not-Fantasy

Know Caruba's Warning Signs

I used the verb “stupefying” to describe a long process in our nation’s schools that has produced several generations of Americans, dumbed down and resulting in more than half who are functionally illiterate, nor can do math, and, as a recent headline reported “Student’s Results in Social Studies Stagnate.”

“U.S. middle-school students’ performance on social studies didn’t improve much between 2010 and 2014, federal test scores released Wednesday (April 29) show, underscoring concerns about the uniformed citizenry and workforce.” When it comes to U.S. history, the share of students scoring at or above proficiency last year was 18%, up one percentage point from 2010. In other words, over 80% failed to have a grasp on the subject, critical to every citizen’s understanding of U.S. history, its Constitution, and governance.

An extraordinary new book by Samuel Blumenfeld and Alex Newman, “Crimes of the Educators: How Utopians are Using Government Schools to Destroy America’s Children” ($26.95, WND Books) should be the center of conversation for a nation’s media, but I suspect this may be among the few places you would learn about it. Blumenfeld has written ten books on education and Newman is an international journalist, educator and consultant.

What history does teach us is that progressives, also known as communists, have slaughtered millions in their quest to create the perfect society where everybody earns the same amount, thus abandoning them to equal poverty. To achieve this, it was necessary to exercise complete control over what the children learned and what the media shared as news.

Blumenfeld notes that “In the United States the socialist utopians adopted a new and unique method of conquering a nation; by dumbing down its people, by destroying the brainpower of millions of its citizens.”

This was launched in 1898 by John Dewey, a socialist, and outlined in his essay titled ‘The Primary-Education Fetich.’ “In it he showed his fellow progressives how to transform America into a collectivist utopia by taking over the public schools and destroying the literacy of millions of Americans.”

“The plan has been so successfully implemented that it is now a fact that half of America’s adult population are functionally illiterate. They can’t read their nation’s Constitution or its Declaration of Independence. They can’t even read their high school diploma.”

This was achieved by changing how children are taught to read in our government schools. Previously the method was phonetics in which children learned the alphabet, the sounds the letters represented, and how in combination they composed words. The present method is called “whole word” in which the child must recognize the whole word without identifying its alphabetical elements. “That forces children to read English as if it were Chinese,” says Blumenfeld.

He notes that most teachers are unaware of what they are doing and most parents trust the public schools that are supposed to represent the cherished values of our democratic republic. “But the unhappy truth is that today’s public schools have rejected the values of the Founding Fathers and adopted values from nineteenth-century European social utopian plans that completely contradict our own concepts of individual freedom.”

Blumenfeld also identifies a fact that is hidden in the growing numbers of people who having passed through our schools or attending experience dyslexia and learning disabilities. Brain scans have demonstrated this.

Our schools are places where the answer to the normal child’s energy and curiousity is deemed being “over-active” and our schools “push various psychiatric drugs on millions of children by requiring them to take such powerful, mid-altering stimulants as Ritalin or Adderal to alleviate such school-induced disorders as attention deficit disorder (ADD) and attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD).

These drugs are as potent as cocaine and have even caused sudden death among teen athletes.”

“The long-term utopian plan required destroying America’s political, social, and moral culture of religious freedom, individual rights, unobtrusive government, and high literacy for all.”

That is a virtual definition of what has occurred in America today. We see it in the attack on religion, particularly Christianity, in America. We see it in the attack on traditional marriage in the name of the homosexual objective of “same-sex marriage.”

We see individual businesses attacked for not wanting to give up their spiritual values and beliefs when challenged by homosexuals. We see it in the vast growth in the numbers of single mothers, often never married. And, of late, we see it in the obscene hatred being directed against our nation’s police forces.

The statistics cited in “Crimes of the Educators” have been published by Jeb Bush’s Foundation for Excellence in Education and they include:

Eighty-one percent of American 18 year olds are unprepared for college coursework.

More than 25 percent of students fail to graduate from high school in four years; for African-American and Hispanic students, this number is approaching 40 percent.

Seventy percent of those in prison and 70 percent of those on welfare read at the lowest literacy levels according to the 1992 National Adult Literacy Survey.

According to tests in 2012 given to 15-year-olds by the Organization for Economic Cooperation & Development, U.S. students were at 17th place in the world on reading, 29th in math, and 20th in science.

“These failures,” says Blumenfeld, “ are not the result of an accident. They are the result of programs created by the best-organized and best-paid educators on the planet. All of these programs that create failure were conceived to produce precisely the results we are getting.”

This explains, too, why many concerned parents have decided to teach their children at home while others spend their money to have their children tutored to overcome the damage of our public schools.

If you have looked around and thought to yourself that too many of the people who see, hear, work with, and who vote are dumb, you now know why.

_____________________________

Become a Truth Serum Partner Now

Is it cool to kill a 7 pound baby?

From the files of the Rand Paul campaign trail at Breitbart.com

Uh - Uh - I'm Debbie - Uh - Uh

Democratic National Committee chairwoman Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz (D-FL) isn’t answering basic questions about her stance on abortion after a bout with Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY) as the Kentuckian launched his bid for president of the United States.

It all started when the Associated Press’ Phillip Elliott tried to corner Paul in an interview on Wednesday morning.

“The thing is about abortion — and about a lot of things — is that I think people get tied up in all these details of, sort of, you’re this or this or that, or you’re hard and fast (on) one thing or the other,” Paul told Elliott when the AP reporter pushed him on abortion exemptions.

“I’ve supported both bills with and without [exceptions], you know. In general, I am pro-life. So I will support legislation that advances and shows that life is special and deserves protection.”

After Wasserman Schultz’ DNC pushed the AP interview to other reporters later on Wednesday, Paul was holding a press conference here in Milford and NH1’s Paul Steinhauser asked Paul about it.

“Senator, the DNC is picking up on comments you made with AP this morning on abortion, and I just wanted to know where you stand on exemptions—should there be any exemptions for abortion or no?” Steinhauser asked.“What’s the DNC say?” Paul joked.

You know, here’s the question. We always seem to have the debate way over here on what are the exact details of exemptions and where it starts. Why don’t we ask the DNC if it’s okay to kill a 7-pound baby in the uterus.

You go back and you ask Debbie Wasserman Schultz if she’s okay with killing a 7-pound baby that’s not born yet. You ask her when life begins and you ask her if she’s willing to protect life. When you get an answer from Debbie, get back to me.

Wasserman Schultz issued a statement responding to Paul that didn’t answer his question. Instead she dodged it, and attempted to reframe the debate.

______________________________________________

Become a Truth Serum Partner Now

Use your voice says Michelle

As long as it agrees with Barack by Jeannie DeAngelis at Clash Daily.com

Michelle “Mixed Message” Obama traveled to Cambodia to encourage young girls to speak up. While there, the U.S. first lady told a Cambodian audience that educating girls allows them “to participate in the political life of their country and hold their leaders accountable,” an idea that should float nicely in a country run by a dictator.

Meanwhile, here in America, with the approval, funding, and hearty endorsement by the Obama administration, by way of feticide, every day 3,000-4,000 babies are denied the right to ever use their voices, half of them girls. So in essence Michelle’s message about girls using their voice only applies if Cambodian mothers choose not to use their voice to say “I’m here to have an abortion.”

While we’re on the subject of abortion, participating in political life, and holding leaders accountable, Mrs. Obama’s husband Barack has been delving into a similar realm, politically speaking. Seems that despite Michelle encouraging “voice usage”, her husband apparently believes that Israeli voters speaking out at the polls is something they shouldn’t be permitted to do.

Melding the quashing of voices and abortive tactics the same way he uses the tax dollars of pro-lifers to pay for abortion procedures they disagree with, it has been revealed that Barack Obama moved U.S. taxpayer monies through non-profit organizations to interfere in the Israel election.

Evidently Obama was exercising his right to choose who should be Prime Minister of Israel and sent a team of government-funded abortionists to Israel to abort Bibi Netanyahu. The only thing missing from this scenario was a bereted band of New Black Panthers stationed outside Israeli polling stations beating back Likud voters with billysticks.

Unfortunately, despite Barack’s best efforts, Bibi was “Born Alive”, so to speak.

Now the only hope Barack Obama has to fulfill his dream of political abortion is to find another way to undermine Bibi’s survival. From the looks of things, the president is counting on Iran to bring to fruition what appears to be his original intent to terminate the Jewish state.

Here’s the problem with all of this: How can Michelle Obama travel to a country ruled by an authoritarian strongman leader, large numbers of school dropouts, and endemic poverty to speak against the very conditions Barack Obama is intentionally cultivating here in America? Worse yet, in Cambodia she encouraged schoolgirls to do what her husband absolutely forbids here at home, which is to allow citizens “participation in political life” by holding him accountable.

Moreover, how can a representative of a government that is restricting First Amendment rights more and more every day be taken seriously when she encourages girls to “use” their voices?

After all, under the Obama regime those who express views that disagree with the president’s are retaliated against by government entities such as the IRS. Fox News and Tea Party activists are publicly mocked and derided for expressing an adversarial opinion, and conservative commentators vilified endlessly by the husband of the woman inspiring others to speak up.

Not only that, but when Bibi came to the United States to verbally express the dangers he believes will ensue if Obama assists Tehran in acquiring a nuclear bomb, Obama did what Michelle suggested schoolgirls in the Cambodian city of Siem Reap do to those who discourage voicing one’s opinion – he ignored Bibi.

Nevertheless, in an effort to undermine an entire sovereign nation from expressing their preference at the polls, if Obama does what he usually does it’s highly likely he’ll attempt to quell the voice of the Israeli people because a democratic election delivered a result opposite to what Barack Obama had hoped.

The truth is that much to Barack Obama’s chagrin, like a woman who visits an abortion clinic late-term only to give birth to a living baby destined to be aborted, Bibi survived.

Now, without an available laundry room to toss the prime minister into in hopes he’ll fade away without oxygen, warmth, and hydration, not to burden the original intent of getting rid of Bibi, Barack Obama must find an alternate route to rid the world, once and for all, of Bibi Netanyahu’s voice.

And so the Obama hypocrisy continues.

We have Mrs. Obama circumnavigating the globe promoting education, political activism, the benefit of holding politicians accountable, as well as free expression for girls. Meanwhile here at home, both girls and boys are being deprived of a voice because, with Michelle’s hearty approval, they’re being denied the right to life. Not to mention Michelle’s husband sic’ing the federal government on any political adversary that demands he become accountable to the nation.

Couple those double standards with President Obama opposing both nationally and internationally the right of individuals and nations to exercise their voice if what is voiced differs from his planetary vision for a progressive Islamic panacea.

Compounding that glaring dichotomy is Obama orchestrating a Chicago-style effort to abort the Israeli Prime Minister by sending a taxpayer-funded goon squad to pulverize the fearless leader whose voice advocates dealing with Iran in ways contrary to what Barack Obama demands.

Jeannie also hosts a blog at www.jeannie-ology.com.

_____________________________

Become a Truth Serum Partner Now

Why moral values matter

From the Warning Signs of of Alan Caruba at Facts-not-Fantasy

Know the Warning Signs From Caruba

"We have no government armed with power capable of contending with human passions unbridled by morality and religion.

Avarice, ambition, revenge or gallantry would break the strongest cords of our Constitution as a whale goes through a net.

Our Constitution is designed only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate for any other." ~~ John Adams (1735 - 1826), second President of the U.S.A.

It’s hard to consider the success of the book and film “Fifty Shades of Gray” without thinking that America has become morally bankrupt in terms of its views toward sexuality and, of course, in other ways as well.

At about the same time I was thinking this, a recent issue of The Wall Street Journal had an article titled “Unmarried…With Children.”

Facts-not-Fantasy

Let me say up front that, having spent the bulk of my life in the last century, I have been a witness to the changes that have occurred and they portend a society that in many ways is in deep trouble. It is not one in which I would want today’s generation of children to grow up.

That said, today’s children are drenched in all manner of information for good or ill that was simply not accessible to earlier generations. Since it reflects the views of popular culture, it often conveys the wrong lessons.

In my youth and up to around the 1960s, some thirty years, the America in which I grew up disapproved of casual sex, abortions, unmarried people living together, pornography, and comparable issues. That has changed.

The article cited the fact that “More than a quarter of births to women of childbearing age—defined here as 15 to 44 years old—in the past five years were cohabiting couples, the highest on record and nearly double the rate from a decade earlier, according to new data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention for 2011 to 2013.”

And here’s a statistic that really caught my attention: “Cohabiting parents now account for a clear majority—59%--of all births outside marriage, according to estimates by Sally Curtin, a CDC demographer. In all, 40% of the 3.93 million births in 2013 were to unmarried women.” Moreover, “It is mostly white and Hispanic couples who are driving the trend, not black couples, experts say.”

“Affluent, highly educated Americans still largely marry before starting families, and single mothers remain more common among the poor.” There was a time when the vast majority of Americans regarded marriage as the bond that had to first exist before a family was started.

There was a time when single motherhood was considered shameful from a moral point of view and understood to be harmful to society in general. According to a 2013 Pew Research Center study, a third of single mothers aren’t working, meaning they are likely to depend on government welfare. Feminists may call this “liberation”, but for those experiencing it, it is called poverty. The median income of working single mothers these days is $23,000 and 44% are never-married moms.

Demography, the study of how a society is composed, looks at the statistics related to age, gender, race, employment, earnings, and other factors may sound like dry stuff, but it reveals where a society is and where it is going.

In a 2012 article by Michael Snyder, “Which is Better—A Society with Loose Sexuality or a Society with Strict Rules for Sexuality?” the author notes that “Today, the percentage of U.S. adults who are married is at an all-time low. According to the Pew Research Center, only 51% of all Americans who are at least 18 years old are currently married at this point. Back in 1960, 72% of all U.S. adults were married.”

The U.S. has the highest divorce rate in the world “by a wide margin” noted Snyder. “What that means is that there are a lot less ‘family units’ than there used to be, and America has become a very lonely place.”

It is also a place which has huge rates of illiteracy. You may not connect literacy, the ability to read, and sexuality, but both relate to the behavior of people. For example, more than 70% of America’s inmates cannot read above the 4th grade level. It means that 75% of Americans who receive food stamps perform at the lowest two levels of literacy, and 90% of high school dropouts are on welfare. One in four children in America grow up without learning how to read.

Now the connection; teenage girls between the ages of 16 to 19 who live at or below the poverty line and have below average literacy skills are six times more likely to have children out of wedlock than girls their age who can read proficiently. These statistics are courtesy of DoSomething.org.

None of the statistics regarding sexuality in America are good for the future of America.

There are other issues that worry my generation. One of them is the legalization of same-sex marriage. The mere use of the word “marriage” to identify such a relationship signals the further destruction of the key element of any healthy society.

From the point of view of health, the legalization of marijuana use is another threat to the welfare of society. There was a reason it was considered dangerous and was illegal. A decade from now we will likely read about the affect it has had on the brains of young people now using it. According to the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration, currently 2.7 million Americans age 12 and older meet the clinical criteria for marijuana dependence or addiction.

For those of us old enough to remember an America where the statistics and trends cited here did not exist because public opinion guided people, particularly the young, toward a more cautious and responsible attitude about sex and marriage, what is occurring is troubling to say the least.

Morality may be ignored, but it never ceases to provide the foundation and guidelines for a healthy society.

_____________________________

Become a Truth Serum Partner Now

Supreme Court malfeasance

Supreme Court Malfeasance from the Warning Signs by Alan Caruba at Facts-not-Fantasy

Know the Warning Signs from Caruba at Facts-not-Fantasy

Over the course of its history the Supreme Court has made some very bad decisions and the decision to declare abortion legal ranks high among them.

On January 22, 1973, in Roe v. Wade the Court interpreted the due process clause of the 14th Amendment to extend a right of privacy to a woman’s decision to have an abortion prior to the third trimester of pregnancy.

There have been 57.5 million abortions since 1973—42 years—when the decision became the law of the land. In all the wars America has fought, going back to the Revolution, the total of those killed in combat as of September 2014 was 1,343,812.

The casualties of the Supreme Court’s decision about unborn Americans reveal the wide gap between the morality, as opposed to the legality, of the Court’s decision.

Now the Court has taken on cases that will determine the legality of same-sex marriage and here again the morality of sanctioning this definition of marriage is a world apart from the morality of marriage occurring exclusively between a man and woman as has been the norm since the earliest history of mankind.

Marriage has always been understood as the critical cornerstone of a healthy functioning society. It has always been understood that children raised by a mother and father are a benefit to society while those deprived of this union are frequently subject to problems of one sort or another.

In the United States, however, many of the traditional morals that served the interest of society have been abandoned since around the middle of the last century. The gap between liberals and conservatives has widened.

One result was recently announced in a Pew Research Center study that found that less than half of all American children now live in a two-parent household with two married heterosexual parents who are, in fact, their own parents.

The Daily Caller reported that “In addition, fully 41% of all American babies are currently born out of wedlock. By way of comparison, in 1960 73% of all American children” lived in a traditional married household.

An earlier Pew Research Center study, announced in August 2013, depicted mothers as the main provider in 40% of American households with children. Jennifer Marshall, Director of the DeVos Center for Religion and Civil Society at the Heritage Foundation, noted that 25% of “households with children under 18 are supported by a single mother.” Their median income was $23,000 and 44% are never-married moms. “More than a third of these single mothers aren’t working at all—meaning they are much more likely to depend on government welfare.”

What all these statistics add up to is a nation in which traditional marriage is under attack while living together unmarried or having children as a single mother have become accepted at an alternative lifestyle.

Now we are being told that America should abandon the concept of legal citizenship and accord it to anyone who crosses the border. This isn’t how an orderly society or sovereign state is defined. It is a definition of anarchy.

As the Supreme Court gets ready to hear the same-sex marriage case, the rest of us are wondering why a tiny minority of society should be granted a right that no society in history has ever imparted.

How small is it? In September 2014 the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) released a report that men who have sex with men (gay and bisexual) comprise about 2% of the U.S. population. When you add in lesbians the number moves up to about 3%.

The CDC tracks such things because “In 2010, among persons newly infected with HIV, 63% were men have sex with men (MSM) and among persons living with HIV, 52% were MSM.” According to the CDC it is contracted primarily through anal sex.

Despite federal spending to combat AIDS, between 2008 and 2010 “new infections increased 22% among young (aged 13-24) gay and bisexual men and 13% among gay and bisexual men overall” regardless of age.

So the nation has been experiencing a holocaust of murdered fetuses thanks to the Supreme Court’s ruling and now we are supposed to abandon the ancient definition of marriage to accommodate a tiny minority of those who engage in sex with the same gender.

If justification for that can be found in the Constitution, then it can be interpreted in any manner to degrade our society and the nation.

Same-sex marriage is an issue that President Obama said was “America at its best” in his State of the Union speech. Seven years earlier, campaigning to become President, he said that marriage was “a sacred union” and was “between a man and a woman.”

I don’t care that a number of states have already extended a legal status to same-sex marriage. I don’t care that it applies to a very small number of Americans. They can have “civil unions” that resolve any legal issues, but “marriage”? No.

Just as I say no to those who want to strip the practice of religion from any public ceremony or remove the saying of prayer in our schools, I will say no to those who want to remove the moral pillars that have served our society and all societies over the millennia.

We can only hope that enough of the current Supreme Court justices feel that way too.

______________________________________________

Become a Truth Serum Partner Now

Texas voters reject (abort) Wendy Davis

Wendy Davis: Rejected by Texas and needs a send-off from the political cartoon studios of A.F. (Tony) Branco and featured at Comically Incorrect.com

Get Your Daily Dose of Humor from A.F. (Tony) Branco

Check out some of the sights listed below that publish the A.F. (Tony) Branco Political Cartoon features.

• Editorial cartoonist
• Net Right Daily
• Legal Insurrection
• Liberty Alliance
• ConservativeDailyNews.com

_____________________________________________________________

Click Here - Become a Truth Serum Partner Now

Pro-Choice Obama Makes Women Feel Unsafe

SAY WHAT? Pro-Choice Obama Makes Women Feel ‘Unsafe’ from the files of Jeannie DeAngelis for Clash Daily.com

A Jennie DeAngelis Feature at Clash Daily.com

Women – a key Obama voting bloc – in a stunning admission are now saying that the man they elected mainly because of his assurance that if they wanted to they could kill their unborn babies, makes them feel “unsafe.”

On MSNBC’s Morning Joe, journalist Tina Brown discussed with Joe Scarborough and Mika Brzezinski the president’s declining poll numbers, his enormous ego, and how, when it comes to Obama, women are now feeling insecure.

“I think [women are] feeling unsafe,” Brown said, “They feel unsafe economically. They’re feeling unsafe with regard to ISIS. What they feel unsafe about is the government response to different crises.”

Sorry to have to break it to the women of America, but when you elect a president whose claim to fame includes putting his approbation on partial-birth abortion and denying medical care to infants born alive in botched abortions – no one is truly safe.

Lest we forget, this is the man who told Jane Sturm that her 105-year-old mother, because of her advanced age and despite her zest for life, would be denied bypass surgery and given a pill.

Now here we are, six years after the Hope and Change Express pulled into the station, and lo and behold, women who wanted to be assured unfettered access to abortion are realizing that the guy who promised them that right is personally responsible for the deaths of children whose mothers wanted their children to live.

Little did American women know when they clamored for free contraceptives and government-funded feticide that Obama’s ideological quest to ”fundamentally transform the United States of America” would include killing dearly-loved children with deadly Third World diseases like Enterovirus 68, Ebola hemorrhagic fever, leprosy, MDR-TB and God knows what else.

But then again, when killing is essentially the motivating factor in voting for someone, it usually doesn’t take long for those who thought they’d be spared the horrific fate 3,000 unborn babies endure each day to find out that everyone’s life, born and unborn alike, has very little value to the man currently exercising his right to choose on a whole nation.

Want to talk “unsafe”? How about Obama’s blatant unwillingness, despite the public outcry, to ease up on the national makeover, which continues to expose 300 million people to everything from the potential to be publicly beheaded to the prospect of bleeding out of every orifice of a virus-riddled body?

Said Tina:

I think they’re beginning to feel a bit that Obama’s like that guy in the corner office, you know, who’s too cool for school, calls a meeting, says this has to change, doesn’t put anything in place to make sure it does change, then it goes wrong and he’s blaming everybody.

Unfortunately, it’s a little late for Ms. Brown and the large swathe of liberal women she speaks for to be figuring that one out.

Moreover, decrying Obama’s propensity to deflect blame is a strange sentiment coming from women who helped set the current tsunami of tragedy in motion – voting twice for the guy who was “too cool for school”, whose only real promise was to protect their right to kill their unborn children.

Visit Jeannie DeAngelis' personal website at www.jeannie-ology.com

_____________________________________________________________

Click Here - Become a Truth Serum Partner Now

Liberated women and the traditional family

Liberated Women and the Traditional Family at Warning Signs by Alan Caruba from Facts-not-Fantasy

Read the Warning Signs

My generation, born in the late 1930s and the 1940s, has witnessed a dramatic change in the role and the rights of women in America. A significant result of the women’s liberation movement is a change in the role of traditional marriage that was reported in early September.

“If you count a generation as spanning 20 years,” wrote Terence P. Jeffery, an editor of CNSnews.com, “then approximately 36 percent of the American generation born from 1993 through 2012—which has begun turning 21 this year and will continue turning 21 through 2033—were born to unmarried mothers.”

By comparison, Jeffrey noted that “Back in 1940, only 3.8 percent of American babies were born to unmarried mothers. By 1960, it was still only 5.3 percent.” There was a time when being a single mother was regarded as a reflection of the woman’s moral values. How a society deals with issues affecting the family as its single most important factor reflects its attitudes regarding marriage.

“It is a statistical fact that the institution of the family,” wrote Jeffrey, “has been collapsing in American over the past 45 years.”

Another statistic has significance as well. Today 51% of the U.S. population is single. A new generation of Americans, men and women, have decided that a committed relationship holds little allure.

The call for women’s rights has a long history. In 1794, Mary Wollstonecraft wrote “A Vindication of the Rights of Women.” She would have felt at home in today’s society. After affairs with two men, giving birth to a daughter by one of them, she married William Godwin, one of the forefathers of the anarchist movement. She died ten days after giving birth to a daughter, Mary Shelley, who grew up to be the author of “Frankenstein.”

Militant political action in Britain began with the formation of the Woman’s Social and Political Union in 1903. Following World War I when women participated in the war industries and support services, they were granted the right to vote in 1918, but it would take until 1928 for the age to be lowered to 21. In the United States in 1848 Elizabeth Cady Stanton led a Women’s Rights Convention followed in 1863 of the Women’s National Loyal League by Susan B. Anthony who wrote and submitted a proposed right-to-vote amendment in 1878. It would take until 1920 for it to be ratified as the 19th Amendment.

The women’s rights movement as we know it gained momentum in the 1960s. It was led by a feminist, fellow writer and friend, Betty Friedan, who was also a committed Leftist and, in 1966, she would help create the National Organization for Women (NOW). In 1971, the National Women’s Political Caucus emerged, led by Bella Abzug, Shirley Chisholm, and Gloria Steinem. Other groups were created as well. The effort to secure an Equal Rights Amendment, however, failed.

Aside from political rights, the issue that most concerned feminists was reproductive rights with the repeal of laws against abortion being the priority. The issue was decided, not by Congress or the states, but by a 1973 decision of the Supreme Court, Roe v. Wade, that ruled 7-2 that the 14th Amendment extended a right of privacy and by extension the right of a woman to opt for an abortion.

That decision freed women both within and outside of marriage to abort an unwanted child. Unforeseen by the Court, was the rise of single-parent families led primarily by women.

As Jeffery noted “In the latest annual report to Congress on “Welfare Indicators and High Risk Factors,” the Department of health and Human Services pointed to the high rate of births to unmarried mothers, saying ‘data on non-marital births are important since historically a high proportion of welfare recipients first became parents outside of marriage.’” They have swelled the numbers of people on welfare, from 32.6 percent in 1992 before rising to 30.7 percent in 2011.

We have reached a point in just over a few decades in which the government, through bad economic policies and a myriad number of programs, Medicaid, food stamps, public housing, and others, has produced 109,631,000 people receiving benefits. They represent 35.4 percent of the overall population.

That’s a long way from the traditional family and it means that half of the working population is providing the funds for those who are unemployed or have stopped looking for work thanks to a stagnate economy.

The single-parent family led by women has denied generations of the young men they are raising the male role models they need to understand that being a father is as great a responsibility as being a mother.

Men have become dispensable except as sperm donors.

Male values of courage, comradeship, and leadership have to be learned from sources outside the single-mother unit.

Then, too, the feminist goal of being in the workplace also frequently means that pre-school children’s early formative years are handed over to strangers in childcare centers whether they come from one or two-parent families. The economy has required that both parents have to work—if work can be found in a society where more than 92 million Americans are unemployed or have, as noted above, ceased looking for a job.

This is not a screed against women’s rights. It is a look at the consequences of the goals feminists have fought to achieve over the past decades.

It’s not about their right to vote or to secure an education to achieve success in the business sector.

It’s about generations of young men and women growing up in a society where a “father” is not an integral part of the “family” and the price our society pays for that.