Christmas has come and gone, with many very nice gifts. And some not so nice ones. Our family got the flu for Christmas and my husband had a death in the extended family. Still, despite those blemishes, we had a wonderful Christmas service, a good dinner with the family, and the presents are still piled in the livingroom.
A lot has happened recently, and most of it has been pushed to the back of our minds due to Christmas. So here are just a few conservative news points as a general update.
Iraq: while the liberal media continues to slam this as a lost cause and inflame the public against our current leader one of the largest jokes in America, the WWE Raw, went and entertained the troops and said all the things the media SHOULD be saying. I watched part of it with my husband, under protest to begin with, then with shock, awe, and a touched heart as these show-boating wrestlers really portrayed an attitude that America as a whole has been lacking since WWII. In other news, while Americans, fueled by the liberals, are increasingly pessimistic about Iraq, Iraq is not. In recent polls 2/3rds of Iraqi citizens say they are better off than they were under Saddam and 82% say their lives will be better a year from now. The recent election was attended by 70% of Iraqi citizens and no major violent incidences were reported *that I have found* By the way these are not 'cooked' number by some ultra pro-war conservative office or anything. The first two statistics come from Joseph Lieberman who is, *gasp* a DEMOCRACT senator from Connecticut. The second comes from the Oregonian which leans so far to the left it would make Clinton blush. Lieberman says that the Iraq war is a war for 27 million Iraqi citizens against 10,000 terrorists. And yet the media says we're losing??? To keep things in perspective, it is a war: US Casualties of war *from greatest to least*:
Civil War: 618,222
World War II: 405,399
World War I: 116,516
Vietnam War: 58,209
Korean War: 54,246
Iraq *most recent I could find*: 2,127
Boy, kind of makes Iraq seem like a resounding success doesn't it?
Church/State: While most of our attention was turned to either blasting Christ out of Christmas or keeping Him in a very telling news bit passed under the radar. In California's Byron Union School District 12 year old students now have a 3 week course in "becoming Muslims". During this time the class is divided into Islamic city groups, take Islamic names and wear name tags with their new names on them. So far so good, we did the same thing in fifth grade for the Revolutionary war period and the Civil war period. But it doesn't end there. Their name tags have the Muslim star and crescent moon symbols, which are religious symbols. They receive materials instructing them to, and I quote, "remember Allah always". They complete the five pillars of Islamic faith, and memorized and recited the basmala, a quote from the Koran, which they also wrote and hung about the classroom. In addition they were given extra credit for fasting from something they liked during Ramadan *sp?*. One article also reported that they memorized and later recited in front of the class various prayers, although this aspect was not reported in the other sources I found. Sounds like religious indoctrination doesn't it? Several parents sued the school district objecting to their children being proselytized so obviously. And here's the real catch the Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, the same court that ruled to take the words "under God" out of the pledge because it was a violation of church and state, is currently hearing this case because the first court ruled IT WASN'T A VIOLATION OF THE CONSTITUTION! Watch, I bet that ultra-liberal court will rule likewise. Talk about a double standard! Could you imagine the uprising that would happen if a public school made kids do the same towards Christianity? They'd arrest the teacher!
Marriage: One of the reasons conservatives have been protesting against so called 'gay marriage' and sometimes even against 'civil unions' is due to the slippery slope argument. Once you redefine marriage, and check any dictionary or historical source it is most definitely a redefinition not an 'expansion' or an 'inclusion', where do you stop? If two men can be married why can't you call three men, one man and two women, or three chimps and a teenager, a marriage? Most of the pro-gay marriage supporters worldwide have denied this, but bisexuals and polyamory *or polysexual, apparently an attempt to make multiple sexual partners at the same time a born trait of some people instead of an preference. Hey, if you can be 'born gay' or 'born transgendered' why not born polyamory?* are closely watching the gay movement for pointers for their fight. In places where the gay fight has been settled, they are starting their war. Now, we're not hearing anything much about it over here, because if the liberal media reported on it it would completely contradict all their talk about how allowing homosexuals to 'marry' won't lead down the slippery slope for marriage to mean anything and everything anyone might want it to mean. But it is happening. A few months ago, its just now being reported on, a Dutch married couple entered into a "samenlevingscontract" with a third partner, another female. The Dutch have more than one marriage arrangement, kind of a three step tango between legally and officially cohabitation as a couple, civil unions, and redefined marriage. Given this "samenlevingscontract" is the lowest step in this marriage higherachy, but the couple is legally recognized as a bound three-some. But technically 'married' or not the same type of showboating by gays in the 1980's in the Netherlands led to civil unions and then to full fledged marriage in the 1990's and beyond. In fact, according to one source "After all, Dutch same-sex marriage advocates still celebrate the foundational role of symbolic gay marriage registries in the early 1990s. Although these had absolutely no legal status, the publicity and sympathy they generated are now widely recognized as keys to the success of the Dutch campaign for legal same-sex unions and ultimately marriage. How odd, then, that American gay-marriage advocates should respond to the triple Dutch wedding with hair-splitting legal discourses, while ignoring the Dutch media frenzy and subsequent signs of cultural acceptance--for a union with far more legal substance than Holland's first symbolic gay marriages. Despite the denials of gay-marriage advocates, in both legal and cultural terms, Victor, Bianca, and Mirjam's triple union is a serious move toward legalized group marriage in the Netherlands." And its not just in la-la land across the ocean. Lawyers at top school such as Yale are already formulating how a legal argument for polygamy can make it through the courts using the homosexual precedent to push bisexuality and polyamory 'rights' to marry. Open the Pandora's box, slide down that slipery slope, and take a left turn at reason and sensibility and you will find a world where everyone's sexual wants are turned into needs, everything is allowed, and 'marriage' has as much meaning as a one-night-stand.
Ethics: Stem cells are being hailed as life savers, the virtual cure all of ails. At least the embryonic version of stem cells. In real life nearly all stem cell successful are ADULT stem cells and using EMBRYONIC stem cells have been a disaster. The problem is the embryonic stem cells belong to someone else, even if its a very small someone else who is now dead because of the 'harvesting' of said stem cells. People's immune system reject them. Sometimes drugs can be used to suppress the rejection reaction but problems still persists. The main one being that, without the normal input of the developing baby the stem cells, while they can be manipulated into nearly any type of cell, can't be turned off. The cells create horrible tumors that can't be controlled. Regardless of these set backs scientists are obsessed with this concept, probably because it gives the pro-abortion group a salve for their failing position that the embryo isn't human. If embryonic stem cells can save lives then the abortion industry had another reason to devalue the lives of the very young to nothing more than a collection of possible parts. This obsession presses them towards some way to use embryonic stem cells despite the risks. One way that they are attempting this is to clone an embryonic cell from the adult who needs treatment. While technically outlawed in the US many scientists worldwide are not only very interested by also actively attempting it. So far the only one to have well-known success is Woo Suk Hawng, a Korean scientist. He had been claiming to have 11 different stem cell lines cloned from an adult patient using donated eggs. It was hailed as the holy grail of stem cell research up till now and Woo Suk Hawng's name has been widely published. The big surprise? ALL 11 LINES WERE FAKED. None of them were genetic matches to his patients and it turns out he even lied about where he got the eggs, some were harvested from his own assistants and some were bought, which is illegal even in Korea. The holy grail has been ripped away. I wish this meant that the scientists are going to give up this horrid 'medical' tangent and focus on safe, proven adult stem cell research but, unfortunately I expect this will simply make other scientists more anxious to be the first person to first clone and then kill a human only to use the parts to harm another human, all in the name of medicine.
Well, there you go, just some random points that have caught my divided attention this holiday that I thought to share. Lets hope that this can be a happy New Year after all the things that have happened in it.