Governments are enthusiastically weaponizing the Leftist trend of sexualizing children, because doing so dramatically increases government power.
What’s terrifying about the child transgender movement is that it’s moved beyond the moral degenerates of the entertainment and media worlds. We’ve now reached the point at which governments are rapidly internalizing it and using it to sever the parent-child bond. Last year in Ohio, parents actually lost custody for not being sufficiently supportive of their daughter’s claimed transgenderism. Currently, in Texas, a father is being told that, if he doesn’t get with his ex-wife’s program of insisting that their six-year-old son wants to be a girl, he will lose any access to his son.
Ladies, you’re free to insist on your rights and privileges all you want. I’ll fully support your right to do so. However, there are men out there – more than a few of them – who regard revealing women’s clothing as an open invitation to make use of what its wearers are advertising. They don’t give a damn about your individuality or your femininity or your freedom of choice. As far as they’re concerned, you’re a “ho” or a “bitch”, and you exist to satisfy their needs. That’s all.
We’ve been having this fight for a while. But this century things have escalated.
They escalated a whole lot after Trump’s win because the network isn’t pretending anymore. It sees the opportunity to delegitimize the whole idea of elections.
Now the network isn’t running the country from cover. It’s actually out here trying to overturn the results of an election and remove the president from office.
It’s rejected the victories of two Republican presidents this century.
There’s only been two, and they’ve rejected both.
This is a civil war between volunteer governments elected by the people and professional governments elected by… well… uh… themselves.
Of the establishment, by the establishment and for the establishment.
Yep.
We’re in a civil war between conservative volunteer government and leftist professional government.
The pros have made it clear that they’re not going to accept election results anymore. They’re just going to make us do whatever they want. They’re in charge and we better do what they say.
That’s the war we’re in. And it’s important that we understand that.
Because this isn’t a shooting war yet. And I don’t want to see it become one.
Personally I’m preparing for one.
Both sides talk about taking back the country. But who are they taking it back for?
The left uses identity politics. It puts supposed representatives of entire identity groups up front. We’re taking the country back for women and for black people, and so on and so forth…
But nobody elected their representatives.
Identity groups don’t vote for leaders. All the black people in the country never voted to make Shaun King al Al Sharpton their representative. And women sure as hell didn’t vote for Hillary Clinton.
What we have in America is a representative government. A representative government makes freedom possible because it actually represents people, instead of representing ideas.
The left’s identity politics only represents ideas. Nobody gets to vote on them.
That’s because their ideas are so good they have to be forced down our throats.
Well, then: shared commerce and finance keeps America knitted together in peace too, right?
But what happens when major corporations, especially those involved in finance and the free exchange of ideas in order to further the aims of participatory democracy, decide they’re going to effectively exile half the country out of the normal systems of the country?
What happens when half of America won’t buy bread from the other half of America, and half of America won’t issue a mortgage to half of America based on their failing a Political Test and Corporate Loyalty Oath?
What happens to the idea that peoples that trade together can’t go to war with each other then?
Invest in precious metals like lead, brass, and copper.
It requires incredible historic ignorance to condemn our Founding Fathers for owning slaves in the 18th century. To the contrary, while by today’s standards we see their ownership of slaves as an atrocity, those are today’s standards and not applicable to other historical periods — unless you are a neomarxist proggie who wants to claim faux victimhood status. The truth is that it was the colonists alive at our Founding who, for the first time in all of human history, began to battle successfully against the institution of slavery as immoral and incompatible with the Jewish and Christian religions.
“Incredible historic ignorance” is exactly what the Democrat Party and the National Education Association are all about. They’ve been incredibly successful at it too.
Bookworm is doing a multi-part series on reparations.
Let us begin with the underlying moral and legal principle that each individual is responsible for his or her actions, and the sins of the father are not visited upon the son. This is a principle that first appears in the Bible…
Quote from Ezekiel 18:20 follows.
Before the Enlightenment, British monarchs often violated this moral and legal principle. These monarchs used Bills of Attainder to extort property and impose “corruption of blood.”…
Our Founders thought these acts so repugnant and immoral that they outlawed them — including imposing penalties for infractions only declared criminal by subsequent law (ex post facto laws) in the body of the Constitution itself, both at federal and state law, and for any crime, including treason.
See Article One, Sections 9 and 10, and Article Three, Section 3 of the U.S. Constitution.
This is profoundly dangerous to us all. Because, not knowing us, they cannot understand where the limits are. They’ve been butting up near our maximum levels of tolerance for some time now. Sooner or later, one of them is going to exceed that boundary because he doesn’t even know it’s there, anymore.
Not sure who’s more insane, this woman, or the government of Great Britain.
The woman, identified only at TT, has sued the Registrar General at the High Court so that she can be “recognized” as the child’s father, or “parent,” according to the Christian Institute.
There is a legal requirement that the mother of a child be listed on the child’s birth certificate as the mother.
But the woman, who already has used the law to change her designated sex to male, objects.
Raphael Samuel said he had a ‘great relationship’ with his parents but has compared having children to ‘kidnapping and slavery’.
The 27-year-old from Mumbai is an ‘anti-natalist’ who believes it is wrong to put an unwilling child through the ‘rigmarole’ of life for the pleasure of its parents.
I do believe that this Leftist ‘problem’ has a Leftist ‘solution.’ I refer, of course, to abortion. It would have to be retroactive, but I doubt that Democrats, especially in New York or Virginia, would have a problem with that.
Why call neighborhoods with mandated ultra-high density “Green Bantustans”? Because the Bantustan was where a racist elite used to herd the African masses during South Africa’s apartheid era. The commonality between the Green Bantustan and the Racist Bantustan becomes clear when you step back and ponder what is happening. In both cases, a privileged elite condemn the vast majority of individuals to live in a concentrated area designed to minimize their impact on the land.…
“Smart Growth” is Not Smart, It’s Just Cruel None of this is necessary. The idea that American policymakers should enforce urban containment is a cruel, entirely unfounded, self-serving lie.
So that’s why. I’m house hunting and I noticed the lack of yards in new construction. I’m avoiding cities now and looking for a couple of acres in the rural areas.
