Concerning This

Marriage Matters - Cohabitation Creates Unstable Lives for Children

2011-09-02T18:54:00.000-07:00

While the divorce rate for couples with children has dropped almost to what it was before the "divorce revolution" in the 1970's, co-habitation has now become a bigger threat to the well-being of children than divorce. Cohabiting partners are more than twice as likely to break up, putting children at risk of unstable circumstances.

Since 1970 the number of Americans living together outside of marriage has increased twelvefold. Children are now more likely to have unmarried parents than even divorced ones, creating a growing risk for children. Forty-one percent of all births are now out-of-wedlock.

WHY MARRIAGE MATTERS

These concerns were published in August of 2011 in a report, "Why Marriage Matters: Thirty Conclusions from the Social Sciences." The report was co-sponsored by the National Marriage Project at the University of Virginia and the Institute for American Values, whose mission is the strengthening of marriage and family life.

W Bradford Wilcox, a sociologist at the University of Virginia, chaired the report which is co-authored by 18 family scholars from leading institutions. More than 250 journal articles on marriage and family were surveyed in forming the conclusions. Wilcox says, "We're moving into a pattern where we're seeing more instability, more adults moving in and out of the household in this relationship carousel."

Children at Risk

The report concludes that the children of cohabiting parents are at risk for a wide range of problems - drug use, depression, psychological problems, dropping out of high school, physical abuse and poverty. Children living in cohabiting households are three times more likely to be physically, sexually or emotionally abused compared to children in intact, biological married parents homes.

Cohabitation more harmful than divorce

Cohabitation is even more harmful to children than divorce, according to Elizabeth Marquardt, director of the Center for Marriage & Families at the Institute for American Values. She is a child of divorce and knows the pain involved in not having a father at home, but Marquardt says that "children of divorce are the lucky ones". She contends that divorce is an institution. It has norms. But cohabitation has no norms. "We can't describe what is happening or what happened... In cohabitation a child's mother and father are not able to form a bond. We don't have names for all of this." There are no norms, rituals or roles that bring stability to the relationships as there is in marriage.

Cohabitation carries with it a breakdown in responsibility and authority. There is no clarity as to the lines of responsibility and authority. Children don't know who is responsible and who will be there to help them.

Cultural shifts lead to retreat from marriage

Cultural shifts are outlined as the most significant factors in the retreat from marriage. The culture has shifted toward a short term, hedonistic focus with the goal of immediate gratification.

Amy L. Wax, Robert Mundheim Professor of Law at the University of Pennsylvania Law School, agrees that the most important causative factors of changing behaviors are cultural not economic concerns. She contends that the demoralization of sexuality and the deregulation of the family that began in the 1960's led to a divergence in class and race in regard to family relationships. While educated whites generally lived traditional lives, minorities, low income and those less educated were hit hard by the demoralization of sexuality.

Wax says that people need guidelines to focus their lives. It used to be that being an adult meant establishing a household. We taught that there are steps we need to take to get from here to there. Now the elite movement toward 'anything goes' and the 'celebration of diversity' contends that we dare not make judgments. They argue that you can't expect the working class to get married.

Cohabitation moves into the Middle Class

Out-of-wedlock births have previously been primarily among the poor, but high school educated whites are now as likely to have children out of marriage. The demoralization of sexuality is moving into the middle class at a rapid pace. Wilcox notes that "family instability is on the rise for American children as a whole."

Why Marriage Matters - Three Conclusions

The authors presenting the new data offer three conclusions regarding marriage and families in America today.

1. The intact, biological, married family remains the gold standard for family life in the United States. Children are most likely to thrive - economically, socially and psychologically - in this family form.

2. Marriage is an important public good, associated with a range of economic, health, educational and safety benefits that help local, state and federal governments serve the public common good.

3. The benefits of marriage extend to poor, working-class and minority communities, despite the fact that marriage has weakened in these communities in the last four decades.

REFERENCES:

1. Marriage Matters - Conclusions from the Social Sciences.

By Press Release: August 16, 2011: University of Virginia - The National Marriage Project

http://www.newswise.com/articles/view/579647/?sc=rsin.

2. Institute for American Values.

Why Marriage Matters : Thirty Conclusions from the Social Sciences.

Why Marriage Matters, The Conversation -Conversation on Blip TV. August 24, 2011.

With Elizabeth Marquardt, Amy L. Wax and W. Bradford Wilcox.

"For the Beauty of the Earth" - Additional Verses

2011-07-09T11:28:00.000-07:00

Retirement brings opportunities for involvement in new experiences of appreciation. Throughout his life my husband, Carl, has enjoyed singing and playing the beautiful hymns of the Christian faith.

Recently Carl has been inspired to write additional verses to the popular Hymn: "For the Beauty of the Earth."

The original text, published by Folliot S. Pierpoint in 1864, praises God for the beauty of the earth and skies, for the joy of ear and eye, for the joy of human love, and for the church "that evermore lifteth holy hands above". Each verse concludes with the response, "Lord of all to thee we raise, this our hymn of grateful praise."

Following are 8 verses that Carl has scripted to continue this antiphony of praise.

***********************

(Carl E. Coppock - July 2, 2011)

Each verse concludes with the refrain from the original hymn;

"Lord of all to thee we raise, This our hymn of grateful praise."

Verse 1.

For the beauty of the morn, Sunlight bright on dew adorns;

Glorious gift is this new day, Ours to use in some special way.

Refrain

Verse 2.

For the joy of night's good rest, A prize for which we're richly blest;

Restores, refreshes body and soul; A quest which always is our goal.

Refrain

Verse 3.

For the blessing of good health, Better far than fame or wealth;

Good health care and genes combine, To give this blessed gift divine.

Refrain

Verse 4.

For the blessing of the rain, Falls on hill and vale and plain;

Lakes and streams, trees, flowers and grass, All things living nourished at last.

Refrain

Verse 5.

For the beauty of the spring, Buds and blossoms, flowers it brings;

Red and yellow, pink and blue, All nature sings of life anew.

Refrain

Verse 6.

For the beauty of the Fall, Autumn's chill cools one and all;

Summer's heat has come and gone, Thanksgiving soon will bid us call.

Refrain

Verse 7.

For the beauty of the sun, Pours its warmth on everyone;

Source of light and source of life, Its radiant beams for our delight.

Refrain

Verse 8.

For the blessing of warm coats, They keep us warm, secure as toast;

Those we wear and those we share, Thankful always for Thy care.

Refrain

*****************

As the years go by I suspect Carl will continue to add verses of thankful praise for the blessings of life, and health and strength.

Including Dad in Parenting: Fathers are Important Too

2011-05-29T17:11:00.000-07:00

With the increase in out of wedlock births and divorce many men are failing to experience the important role of fatherhood and many children are growing up without a father for support, nurture and protection.

"A good society celebrates the ideal of the man who puts his family first." 1.

However our society is moving in the opposite direction. Never before in our country have so many children grown up without a father to protect and guide them. A caring father has traditionally provided economic, educational, moral, social, and psychological support for his family.

Today many fathers have abandoned their children or have been left out of the family experience.

Single motherhood is a long, hard journey for both mother and children. Single mothers have less time for each child and little time for themselves.

Children living without a father are 7 times more likely to experience poverty.

Fathers are important in helping a child grow emotionally and socially. Girls without a father often experience difficulty in developing a realistic view of men. Boys without a father fail to have a role model for responsible ways to relate in society as a man. Friends and gangs become their role models. 2.

Research studies have found that more than 70% of juveniles in reform institutions come from fatherless homes.

Our schools, churches and community centers need to provide learning opportunities to turn young men into responsible fathers for the support of their families and community.

Some women prefer to raise their children alone because the father is abusive, destructive and overbearing with the family. The social welfare system generally ignores the role of young fathers. However, helping young men learn the responsible, nurturing, and supportive roles of fatherhood is an essential need for our communities.

Fatherhood is the most important role for men because it helps them become pro-social.

An effective father accepts and affirms his children and helps them to grow in responsible and positive ways. An effective father supports and cares for his children's mother.

References:

1. Blankenhorn, David. Fatherless America: Confronting Our Most Urgent Social Problem. Harper Perennial. 1995:5.

2. Gibbs, Nancy R. "Bringing Up Father." Time. Vol. 141, No.26. June 28, 1993:52-61.

Marriage or Living Together - Does It Really Matter?

2011-05-18T12:07:00.000-07:00

Over the last several decades living arrangements have changed dramatically. In 1970 only 1 million opposite sex couples lived together outside of marriage. By 2007 this number had increased to 6.4 million. 1.

Living together without a marriage commitment has become a popular arrangement. Some have no intention to get married, enjoying the conveniences and freedom to leave if things aren't satisfactory. Others see living together as a trial marriage - to see 'how it goes'.

However, many children are born into these arrangements. Having a child is a lifetime commitment to support and care for this person throughout his or her lifetime. Children deserve and need the love and support of both a mother and a father.

Social science research studies overwhelmingly show marriage, rather than 'living together', as providing better support for men, women and children throughout their lives.

All relationships fall into troubled times. Marriage offers promised permanence and support 'in sickness and health, in plenty or want, till death do us part'. Marriage vows serve as glue that holds people together to support each other even in difficult times.

Marriage provides the best support for children during their years of growing and developing.

Marriage creates healthier individuals. People who are married and committed to helping each other through all the changing times of life are better off emotionally, physically, financially and vocationally than unmarried partners. Marriage partners are more likely to be faithful. 2.

Conclusions from social science research show that a commitment to marriage: 3.

* increases the likelihood that both fathers and mothers have good relationships with their children,

* reduces poverty and material hardship for women and children,

* is associated with better health and lower rates of injury, illness and disability,

* reduces the risk of delinquent and criminal behavior, especially for boys,

* reduces the risk of child abuse,

* increases the ability of children to do well in school.

In planning life arrangements for children and family well-being, it is important to consider all the information that will support a healthy lifestyle.

References:

1. Jayson, Sharon. "Census reports more unmarried couples living together". USA Today. 7/28/2008.

2. Warren, Dr. Neil Clark. "The Cohabitation Epidemic". Focus on the Family. June/July 2003:10-11.

3. Institute for American Values. Why Marriage Matters, Second Edition: Twenty-Six Conclusions from the Social Sciences. New York:NY. 2005:10-11.

Speak Out Against Pornography!

2011-03-29T18:48:00.001-07:00

OFFENSIVE TO MANY!

Although obscenity and indecency are not protected by the First Amendment, in June of 1999 Forbes magazine contended that the mainstreaming of pornography had developed into a $56 billion business. Pornography is profitable to an extensive network of people. 1.

However, what benefits some is offensive and harmful to many. Criminal Justice statistics document that in 1996, 38 percent of Americans thought pornography should be illegal for everyone, and 58 percent thought it should be illegal for persons under eighteen. 2.

SPEAK OUT!

Citizens are encouraged to speak out to protest obscenity in our culture by:

* writing letters to the editors of the local paper to express concern,

* writing to elected officials to actively prosecute obscenity, and

* writing letters of complaint to businesses that distribute or advertise pornography.

SAMPLE LETTER (or write your own)

Dear Owner/Managers

While shopping in your store recently I noticed that you sell pornographic magazines. Please consider the harm such materials have on children's lives, our families and our community.

Statistics show that the largest consumers of pornography are children ages 12 to 17 - formative years of a young person's emotional and sexual development.

Young people are being drawn into early and promiscuous sexual behaviors. Addictions are created that harm healthy relationships and tear apart marriages and families.

* The Center for Disease Control reports that 1 in 4 teen girls has a sexually transmitted disease, often leading to cancer or infertility.

* Since 1973, more than 50 million abortions have been performed in the U.S.

- over 80% to unmarried women, 52% to women younger than 25 years of age, 19% to teens.

* 40% of births are now out-of-wedlock births.

* Out-0f-wedlock births and the increase in divorce leaves many men out of the important role of fatherhood and leaves children without a father for guidance and support.

* Children born to unwed mothers are six times more likely to live in poverty.

* Pornography is used by predators to lure children and young women into abuse and prostitution.

* Rapists and serial killers repeatedly identify pornography as a formative factor in their behaviors.

You have no obligation to sell pornography. This is not a matter of censorship. It is a matter of good citizenship and responsible choice as to what is appropriate material to be placed in a store where families shop.

Please consider replacing these materials with something more responsible. I'm sure many people in the community would support you in this decision.

I look forward to hearing from you in regard to this concern.

Sincerely,

(Sign your name)

*************************

If polite letters are not effective, pressure on elected officials to support legislation actively prosecuting obscenity and indecency in the community and media would be appropriate and necessary.

Our children and grandchildren should not be burdened by the immense moral burden that is being passed on to them by our careless abandonment of foundational personal and social values.

References:

1. Thomas, Cal. "Selling out a heritage; AT&T becomes a top provider of pornography."

World magazine. Vol. 15, No.25 (June 24) 2000:31.

2. Henslin, James M. Social Problems. 5th Ed. Upper Saddle River, NJ:Prentice-Hall. 2000:75-81

3.American Family Association. A Guide to What One Person Can Do About Pornography.

www.afa.net/pornography/PornGuide.pdf. pg. 41-45.

Speak Out Against Pornography!

2011-03-29T18:48:00.000-07:00

OFFENSIVE TO MANY!

SPEAK OUT!

Citizens are encouraged to speak out to protest obscenity in our culture by:

* writing letters to the editors of the local paper to express concern,

* writing to elected officials to actively prosecute obscenity, and

* writing letters of complaint to businesses that distribute or advertise pornography.

SAMPLE LETTER (or write your own)

Dear Owner/Managers

While shopping in your store recently I noticed that you sell pornographic magazines. Please consider the harm such materials have on children's lives, our families and our community.

Statistics show that the largest consumers of pornography are children ages 12 to 17 - formative years of a young person's emotional and sexual development.

Young people are being drawn into early and promiscuous sexual behaviors. Addictions are created that harm healthy relationships and tear apart marriages and families.

* The Center for Disease Control reports that 1 in 4 teen girls has a sexually transmitted disease, often leading to cancer or infertility.

* Since 1973, more than 50 million abortions have been performed in the U.S.

- over 80% to unmarried women, 52% to women younger than 25 years of age, 19% to teens.

* 40% of births are now out-of-wedlock births.

* Out-0f-wedlock births and the increase in divorce leaves many men out of the important role of fatherhood and leaves children without a father for guidance and support.

* Children born to unwed mothers are six times more likely to live in poverty.

* Pornography is used by predators to lure children and young women into abuse and prostitution.

* Rapists and serial killers repeatedly identify pornography as a formative factor in their behaviors.

Please consider replacing these materials with something more responsible. I'm sure many people in the community would support you in this decision.

I look forward to hearing from you in regard to this concern.

Sincerely,

(Sign your name)

*************************

Our children and grandchildren should not be burdened by the immense moral burden that is being passed on to them by our careless abandonment of foundational personal and social values.

References:

1. Thomas, Cal. "Selling out a heritage; AT&T becomes a top provider of pornography."

World magazine. Vol. 15, No.25 (June 24) 2000:31.

2. Henslin, James M. Social Problems. 5th Ed. Upper Saddle River, NJ:Prentice-Hall. 2000:75-81

3.American Family Association. A Guide to What One Person Can Do About Pornography.

www.afa.net/pornography/PornGuide.pdf. pg. 41-45.

Pornography and Sex Trafficking: The Rape of Our Children - What Can Be Done?

2011-03-06T17:02:00.000-08:00

THE TRAGEDY OF SEX TRAFFICKING

Sex trafficking (sex slavery) has become BIG BUSINESS in our country. "The FBI estimates that more than 100,00 children and young women ages 9-19 are trafficked for sexual profit in the United States. The average age of entry into the sex trade is 11 to 13 years old." 1. The National Center for Missing and Exploited Children estimates that 300,000 minors are at risk of being sexually exploited for commercial use. 2.

Recently the San Antonio Express News reported that a 13 year old girl in San Antonio had been "tied up and raped day after day by random men". Brothers who were supplying drugs in their neighborhood allowed men to rape her for 25$ extra. (12/8/10; 12/9/10:2B)

Tanya was a 12 year old girl when she accepted a ride home from an older boy who befriended her. Her life changed forever when he physically beat her to establish his 'ownership' and then prostituted her out to over 100 men per month. 3.

PORNOGRAPHY LIGHTS THE FIRE.

Pornography is fuel that fires the demand for this tragic market.

Without the demand, there would be no sex market and no sex slavery.

Before the 1950's, porn was sold undercover from the trunks of cars. In 1953 Playboy brought it into living rooms. The portrayal of children as sexual objects was promoted by Playboy, Penthouse and Hustler, which regularly depicted children in sexual scenarios. 4.

Pornography now brings in more $$$ than all the sports franchises combined!

NOT PROTECTED SPEECH

In 1957, the U.S. Supreme Court declared that prurient representations (images presenting immoderate or unwholesome sexual interest or desire) are not protected by the First Amendment.

WHAT YOU CAN DO TO COMBAT PORNOGRAPHY.

* Write letters of complaint to businesses that distribute or advertise pornography.

* Write letters to the editor of the local paper to express concern.

* Write letters to your U.S. Attorney and State Prosecutor, Senators and Representatives asking them to support legislation to actively prosecute obscenity in the media and to strengthen penalties for human traffickers.

* Ask religious leaders to address pornography as a spiritual problem.

* Support organizations that are speaking to these concerns, including:

- The American Family Association

- Citizens for Community Values

- Concerned Women for America

- Covenant House

- Morality in Media, Inc.

- Shared Hope International

- The Parents Television Council

SPEAK OUT!

Obscenity is defined by community standards which are determined by people who speak out.

+ To protect the well-being of our culture, our children, and our families, concerned people need to take a stand for decency in our cultural depictions of sexuality.

References:

1. Vincent, Lynn. World. April 19/26, 2008. Vol. 23, No. 8. pg.57.

2. International Crisis Aid. www.crisisaid.org. pg. 1

3. James, Teddy. "The New Abolitionists" AFA Journal. October, 2009:14.

4. Parillo, Vincent N. Contemporary Social Problems. Allyn and Bacon, Boston. 1999:105-109.

A Mushrooming Social Problem

2010-12-30T18:33:00.000-08:00

Pornography is both a controversial and an emotional issue.

Pornography depicts sexual behavior in a way designed to sexually excite the viewer.

In defining pornography a distinction is made between erotica, (depiction of sexual passion and love) and pornography (depiction of sexual behavior that presents men, women or children in a way that dehumanizes, degrades or exploits them).

Pornography is further classified as either 'soft core' (R-rated) or 'hard core' (X-rated). 1.

IDENTIFYING OBSCENITY

Pornography is labeled 'obscene' when it sinks to exploitation and portrays humans as mere objects. Obscenity is not speech protected by the First Amendment of the Constitution.

In Roth v. U.S. (1957), the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that materials are pornographic or obscene when:

1. "Taken as a whole", the dominant theme "appeals to a prurient (lewd) interest" in sex.

2. The material affronts "contemporary community standards",

3. The material is "utterly without redeeming social values."

In California v. Miller (1973) the Court removed ambiquities of the earlier decision by keeping the dominant "prurient" theme but explaining that community standards referred to the local community. The reference "without redeeming social values" was eliminated.

MANY DEEP CONCERNS

While there is controversy about what constitutes pornography, the fear that pornography corrupts people deeply concerns many Americans.

Almost everyone agrees that pornography should be restricted.

In 1996, a report published in Criminal Justice Statistics noted that:

* Only 3% agreed that pornography should be legal for everyone,

* While 38% agreed that pornography should be illegal for everyone,

* 58% agreed that pornography should be illegal

for persons under eighteen. 2.

PORNOGRAPHY MUSHROOMS

Before the 1950's, pornography was something considered inappropriate and sold undercover from the trunks of cars. In the last 60 years the distribution of pornography has mushroomed.

The publication of Playboy magazine in 1953 brought it out into living rooms and public awareness.

In 1973, Americans spent $10 million on pornography. By 1997, pornography had become an eight billion dollar industry. 3.

CHILD PORNOGRAPHY - A PARTICULAR CONCERN

The portrayal of children as sexual objects was promoted by Playboy, Penthouse, and Hustler magazines, which regularly depicted children in sexual scenarios. A content analysis of these magazines between 1953 to 1984 yielded 6,004 depictions of children ages 3 to 11 in erotica/pornography. 4.

The portrayal of sex with children is of particular concern. Legislation in 1982 (New York v. Ferber) and 1990 (Osborne v. Ohio) defined any lewd depiction of a child under the age of 18 years to be illegal. 5.

Federal legislation provides prison terms to people who either produce or possess child pornography.

CONCERNING PORNOGRAPHY

Some people argue that pornography provides a safety valve for the private release of sexual fantasies. They hail it as 'safe sex', safe from pregnancy or disease.

Others are concerned that pornography degrades women and children and desensitizes men to violence against them.

In 1986, the Meese Commission, appointed by President Reagan, found "a causal relationship between exposure to sexually violent materials and an increase in aggressive behavior toward women." 6.

Specific findingsof the Meese Commission include:

1. Of 411 offenders, the average had 336 victims,

2. Rape increases where pornography laws are liberalized,

3. Rapists are much more likely than non-offenders to have been exposed as children to hard-core pornography.

4. States with higher sales of pornography have higher rates of rape. 7.

A DANGEROUS ADDICTION

Pornography is addictive and leaves the viewer wanting more. Addiction can lead to desires that escalate from viewing pictures; to visiting strip clubs; to prostitution and voyeurism; to felony behaviors.

A STAND FOR DECENCY

Our culture is being sexually saturated with an increasing avalanche of pornography. Obscenity is defined by community standards which are determined by people who stand up and speak out. If we are to protect the well-being of our culture, ourselves, our children and our families, it is necessary for all concerned people to become active in taking a stand for decency in our cultural depictions of sexuality.

REFERENCES:

1. Palen, J. John. Social Problems for the Twenty-First Century. McGraw Hill, Boston. 2000:447-450.

2. Henslin, James M. Social Problems. Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River, NJ. 2000:75-81.

3. Veith, Gene Edward. World magazine. April 7, 2001. Vol. 16, No. 13:17.

4. Parrillo, Vincent N. Contemporary Social Problems. Allyn and Bacon, Boston. 1999:105-109.

5. AFA.net. American Family Association. www.afa.net/FAQ.aspx?id=2147484819.

6. Palen, pg.449.

7. Henslin, pg. 78.

Prude Pride - Restoring Sexual Sanity

2010-09-27T17:00:00.000-07:00

"The real corrupters of society may be, not the corrupt, but those who have held back the righteous leaven, the salt that has lost its savor, the innocent who have not even the moral courage to show what they think of the effrontery of impurity." 1.

Sexual temptations are pulling the moral foundation out from under our culture, our children's lives and our families. Young people are being drawn into early and promiscuous sexual relationships.

Our parents and grandparents would have made a public outcry against the sexual portrayals that assault us. Today we are silent and leave it to the 'sexperts' to advise us.

CONSEQUENCES OF OUR SILENCE

* The Center for Disease Control reports that 1 in 4 teens has a sexually transmitted disease, often leading to cancer or infertility. 2.

* Since Roe vs. Wade, more than 50 million abortions have been performed in the U.S.

- 81% to umarried women; 52% younger than 25 years of age; 19% to teens. 3.

* 40% of births are now out-of-wedlock births. 4.

*Out-of-wedlock births and the increase in divorce leaves many men out of the important role of fatherhood and leaves 40% of children without a father for guidance and support. 5.

*Condoms, with a 14% actual use failure rate, are handed out freely in schools, even at the junior high level. 6.

* Homosexuality, the leading cause of HIV/AIDS, is being taught as a normal lifestyle even in elementary schools and kindergartens. "One in five sexually active gay and bisexual men has the AIDS virus, and nearly half of those don't know they are infected." 7.

SIMPLE AND COMPLEX PLEASURES

We have been blessed with an abundance of simple pleasures for our sensual enjoyment;

* sunshine sparking on water,

* brilliant flowers and sunsets,

* wind blowing through our hair,

* cool water on a hot day.

Sexual relationships are complex pleasures.

Sexual behaviors involve the life of another person in action and experience.

Relating to another person in a sexual way involves the physical, mental, spiritual, and emotional aspects of the person's life.

Sexual relationships are much more than toys for personal hedonistic and temporary pleasures.

Sexual behaviors affect:

*the way people feel about themselves and others,

* the way people relate to the past and the future, and

* the way people relate to family and friends.

Above all, sexual behaviors can produce new life which deserves honor and respect.

CONSENSUAL SEX HAS FAR REACHING TIES.

When family, friends, and community relationships are drawn into the often destructive and painful consequences of sexual behaviors, consensual sex cannot be appropriately limited to decisions between sexual partners.

When casual sex results in sexually transmitted diseases that cause infertility, AIDS, or other debilitating diseases more people are affected than the persons engaging in the sex act.

When adultery results in broken vows and broken marriages, innocent children and spouses are deeply and cruelly hurt.

Sexual relationships require interpersonal responsibility for the participating parties and for the larger community of family and friends in which the persons are embedded.

PRUDE PRIDE - It's time to speak up!

It's time to restore wisdom to our sexual behaviors, using caution, circumspection, reason and good judgment.

It's time to proudly and boldly uphold prudence in our approach to sexual relationships.

It's time to cherish and protect our sexual life and the sexual life of others.

It's time to speak up and restore sexual sanity in our society.

REFERENCES

1. Thom, J.H. 1928. Daily Strength for Daily Needs. New York: Grosset & Dunlop. pg.221.

2. Associated Press. March 11, 2008. http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/23574940.

3. Associated Press. Nov. 21, 2006. MSNBC.com.

4. Harris, Gardiner. "40% of babies born to unwed." San Antonio Express News. May 14,

2009:6A.

5. Blankenhorn, David. Fatherless in America. NY: Harper Perennial. 1996.

6. Workshop Summary: Scientific Evidence on Condom Effectiveness for Sexually Transmitted

Diseases. June 12-13, 2000. http://www.3.nlaid.nih.gov/about/organization/dmid/PDF/

condom report.

7. Stobbe, Mike. "HIV rate high in bisexual, gay men". San Antonio Express News. Sept 24,

2010:11A.

Summarizing the Second Year of Concerns

2010-06-25T11:29:00.000-07:00

At the end of March 2010, 'Concerning This' celebrated it's second year of discussion and comment on social issues that create social problems. In his book, Contemporary Social Problems, Vincent Parrillo defined four elements of a social problem.

Elements of a Social Problem: 1.

1. They cause physical or mental damage to individuals or society.

2. They offend the values or standards of some powerful segment of society.

3. They persist for an extended period of time.

4. They generate competing proposed solutions.

* FIRST YEAR ENTRIES

The first year of blog entries in 'Concerning This' was summarized in the entry of March 27, 2009. These discussions dealt with social concerns related to the breakdown of the family, sexually transmitted diseases, pornography, secularization of society, euthanasia, abortion, and movements toward reproductive technologies, homosexuality and socialism.

* SECOND YEAR ENTRIES

Summaries of discussion from May 5, 2009 through this entry are listed here.

A Mother's Day Tribute - May 5,2009

Mom wrote poetry to express her thoughts and feelings. She passed away at 89 after passing on a rich heritage of love to her children and grandchildren. Six of her poems are included, ending with her ode to 'Night'.... "Listen, my soul, To the silence of peace, Enveloping night in it's lazy release."

Obama, Socialism, Jewish Influence and the Threatened Family - June 17, 2009

Pastor Jeremiah Wright and James von Brunn, who killed a security guard at the Holocaust Museum, both accuse President Obama of being influenced by Jewish socialism. A San Antonio Express News columnist, Jonathan Gurwitz, dismisses them as 'nutjobs on the left and right'. I reproduce my guest column that was printed in The Ithaca Journal on December 7, 1976. I wrote this article, titled "The Nuclear Family: Is It Threatened by Science?", as a graduate student at Cornell University. I express concerns related to ideas expressed by Dr. Urie Bronfenbrenner, a Jewish professor of Human Ecology, who was at that time actively promoting a movement toward socialism.

Health Care Reform Begins at Home - July 2, 2009

Each of us makes decisions about our physical and psychological health and wellness. Lifestyle choices related to eating, exercise, cleanliness, drinking, smoking, drug use, reckless driving, sexual behaviors, and family relationships can create personal illness and injury. Health and wellness begins with us and our personal choices.

Keys to Loving Family Relationships - January 10, 2010

Loving relationships within the family lay a foundation for personal health and wellness. The family is the unique organization in which we become whole in our relationships. This wholeness requires that we grow in the graces of faithfulness, patience, forgiveness and self-control. Four keys that help unlock healthy relationships in our families include: Positive communication, Money management, Conflict resolution and Attitudes of gratitude.

The Gay Battle for Social Reorganization of America - January 29, 2010

The movement to bring homosexual behavior into social acceptance is challenging every social institution with fundamental change, including the government and legal systems, educational systems, the professional health industry, corporations, religious organizations, the institution of marriage and family, the media, and the military. This entry introduces the discussions that examine the social problems introduced by this struggle.

(2) Reforming Education - February 3, 2010

In 1974 the National Education Association added 'sexual orientation' to its resolution on nondiscriminatory personnel policies. The normalization of homosexuality became politically correct in academic and educational settings. At the elementary level students are informed of the five gender orientations: male, female, gay, lesbian, and bisexual. Challengers are intimidated and silenced. Groups supporting traditional family values organize to oppose the gay takeover of educational institutions.

(3) The Professional Health Establishment - February 9, 2010

In 1973 the American Psychiatric Association, under duress from a homosexual faction in the group, voted to strike homosexuality from the list of psychiatric illnesses. Only one-third of the membership was involved in the decision. When the organization made it a violation for a psychiatrist to help a homosexual patient become heterosexual even at the patient's request, therapists who help homosexuals change and ex-homosexuals threatened to file a lawsuit.

Christian groups, including Exodus and Love Won Out organized to minister to those who struggle with unwanted same-sex attractions.

(4) Politics of GRID-HIV/AIDS - February 13, 2010

HIV/AIDS was first recognized in the United States in 1981 when homosexual men were breaking out with a rare, ugly cancer, Kaposi's Sarcoma. This wasting disease was known then as GRID, "gay-related immune disorder". Unexpectedly the gay community's first priority was to protect the homosexual lifestyle as a normal and safe way of life. Homosexual activists moved to rename the disease to AIDS, "acquired immune deficiency syndrome", although gay related anal intercourse and promiscuity created and continues to preserve the American reservoir for HIV/AIDS. AIDS was politicized from the start.

(5) Safe Sex Becomes Seductive - February 19, 2010

Condoms are being distributed around the world as the solution to casual sexual behaviors in preventing pregnancies and STD's. However, the typical use failure rate of condoms is 14%, accounting for inconsistent and incorrect use as well as breakage and slippage. Life expectancy for gay and bisexual men is compromised by perhaps 20 years. Through 2007, the cumulative estimated deaths from AIDS in the United States was 562,793. Syphilis has reemerged as a public health threat because of male homosexuality. Anal cancer is a particular concern.

(6) Gays Confront the Media - March 1, 2010

Three years after the 1969 Stonewall Riots, representation on prime time TV became a symbolic target. Gays working in the TV industry were 'agents' who leaked information to activists about upcoming episodes in which gays were depicted negatively. Hostile and confrontational meetings ensued. Gay activists were invited by TV executives to comment on scripts dealing with homosexuality. In the 70's, more and more gay characters appeared on prime-time TV with the aim to educate the public to accept gay people and their lifestyles.

(7) Gay Demographics - March 7, 2010

Gays are estimated to exceed 18 million in the U.S. A large majority have disposable incomes above the national average with many holding professional positions in society. Marketing to the gay community has developed into a lucrative endeavor.

Gays are not randomly distributed. The 2000 Census reports that one-quarter of same-sex households were located in five urban areas: New York City, Los Angeles, San Francisco, Washington D.C., and Chicago.

(8) Gays in the Corporations - March 10, 2010

Corporations recognized that singles without family ties were able to dedicate time to their jobs and were free to travel around the country. Employee associations developed in corporate America to lobby for gay rights. By 1995, more than 60 American companies had lesbian, gay and bisexual employee groups; half of the Fortune 1000 companies had nondiscrimination policies that included sexual orientation.

When Pepsico and McDonald's became publicly and actively involved in pro-gay policies, opposing groups responded with boycotts.

(9) The Gay Agenda Battles the Military - March 14, 2010

Since 1917, American military law has outlined punishment for homosexual soldiers. In 1981 the Deputy Secretary of Defense issued a policy stating that homosexuality is incompatible with military service. President Clinton unsuccessfully sought to overturn this policy, settling for "Don't ask, don't tell". President Obama campaigned on a commitment to end the ban against gays openly serving in the military. Although Congress has moved in this direction, powerful groups continue to oppose this social agenda.

(10) Gay Reproduction - March 20, 2010

Reproductive technologies present many questions about the future of social, ethical, and family practices. In 1982 the Sperm Bank of California provided sperm to unmarried and lesbian women. Commercial egg donations and surrogacy offered the possibility for a man to create a family. In the 1990's homosexual couples began to use surrogacy in what was labeled a 'gayby' boom.

Gay activists want society to adopt a flexible definition of marriage and family. Dr. David Blankenhorn, a family scholar and founder of the Institute for American Values, argues that the rights of children are put in jeopardy. The child's right to a natural biological heritage is denied to him or her.

(11) Gay Adoption - March 25, 2010

In 2007, 65,000 adopted children were being raised in the U.S. by same-sex partners or singles and 14,100 foster children were living with one or more gay or lesbian foster parents. States differ in their laws for single gays and lesbians and same-sex couples who seek to adopt.

Opponents argue that children suffer from not having both a mother and a father. The Catholic Church has been highly involved in adoption services. Changes in legislation which prohibit discrimination based on sexual orientation jeopardizes the ability of the church to continue offering family services.

(12) Moving Toward Marriage - March 27, 2010

Gay men and lesbians in steady relationships are unable to marry and obtain the legal benefits of marriage. Activists campaign for the right to marry. In 1996 Congress adopted the federal Defense of Marriage Act, defining marriage as a legal union between one man and one woman.

When the U.S. Supreme Court struck down the nation's sodomy laws in 2003, the highest court in Massachusetts ruled that same-sex marriage was permissible. A concern developed that courts would set social agendas. By 2008, 37 states had established their own Defense of Marriage Acts and 30 states had constitutional amendments protecting traditional marriage.

However, same-sex marriage was gaining acceptance. As of early 2010, 6 states and the District of Columbia allowed same-sex marriage, although no states had legalized gay marriage by referendum of the people.

(13) Gays Confront the Church - March 30, 2010

Scriptures from the Jewish Bible and the New Testament support husband/wife unions and condemn homosexual relationships. Gay activist groups challenged synagogues and churches to include homosexuals and allow them to participate without discrimination in church activities.

Fundamental groups held firm to scriptural guidance, while mainline churches, especially within the leadership of the denominations, were moving toward inclusion. Passage of the Employment Non-Discrimination Act would make it illegal to hire or fire persons based on sexual orientation. Religious liberties of organizations and individuals would be threatened and put in jeopardy.

(14) Politics and Beyond - April 6, 2010

Gays are becoming increasingly more visible. The Power 50: The Most Powerful Gay Men and Women in America were outed on the Out.com website. The five first choices are listed as: David Giffen, a Hollywood billionaire; Anderson Cooper, anchor of CNN News; Ellen DeGeneres, talk show host; Tim Gill, the country's biggest gay political donor, and Barney Frank, Democratic Congressman from Massachusetts. Throughout his campaign, President Obama made it clear that he supported the homosexual 'civil rights' movement.

(15) The Consequences - April 9, 2010

The normalization of homosexuality in society will bring about profound changes in social organization, particularly in regard to social integration, reproduction, health and the intergenerational transfer of cultural values.

Heterosexual family forms have been protected through centuries of civilizations and in virtually all societies. Normalizing same-sex marriage would subsidize reproductive technologies and endorse the idea that a child does not really need a mother and a father. Religious values of many Americans in regard to appropriate sexual relationships would no longer be legally accepted, leading to state imposed restrictions on religious freedoms.

(16) Equal Persons, Equal Ideas, Equal Behaviors? - May 31, 2010

Our patriotic 'faith' statement that all are created equal is not a statement of fact but a statement of 'faith' in the spiritual and eternal worth of each striving soul. Our 'right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness' does not include the right to confront the well being of the larger social good. Equality of persons cannot be equated to the concept that all ideas or behaviors are created equal. We are now being told that ideas and behaviors held by a minority must be considered equal to ideas and values that have been cherished and protected by the majority of people.

Responsible debate and consideration of behavioral and social consequences are the best way to ensure well being for the larger good and the protection and support for all citizens.

Reference:

1. Parrillo, Vincent N. Contemporary Social Problems. Boston:Allyn and Bacon Pub. 1999:6.

(16) Equal persons, equal ideas, equal behaviors? : The Gay Battle for Social Reorganization of America

2010-05-31T13:51:00.001-07:00

Master Status?

Our society seems to now be identifying a person primarily by sexual orientation or gender identity. This places sexual behavior on the throne as the most important aspect of our lives. However, a person's sexual orientation is not their master status.

We are individuals who have potential for developing and making choices about how we live our lives. We are endowed with many abilities and opportunities to move and grow in many directions. We are not pre-determined. We all have potential for many sexual behaviors, depending on our nature, our nurture, our choices and our social influences.

Created equal

Our country was founded on a patriotic 'faith statement' that declares all men (presumably, people) are created equal. This is not a statement of fact, because in fact, we are not equal. We differ in innumerable ways. People differ in value both in regard to themselves and in regard to society.

The founding fathers affirmed a divine power. Our 'created equal' faith statement only has truth in the light that we have worth endowed by our creator as a searching and striving soul. We have spiritual and eternal worth. The assumption of the ultimate equality of each person cannot be separated from the soul.

Our democracy was founded on the essential assumption that individuals can and will strive for goodness. Our affirmed 'right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness' does not include the right to violently or carelessly confront the well being of the larger social good.

Countries that lose a foundation of spiritual reality soon demonstrate that many people who are no longer contributing to or supporting the political agendas are no longer needed or wanted in the society.

Equal ideas / behaviors?

To say that all persons are created equal cannot be equated with saying that all ideas and behaviors are created equal. However, this seems to be the outgrowth and false conclusion that our culture is proclaiming. We are now saying that ideas and behaviors held by a small minority of persons must be considered equal to ideas and values that have been cherished and supported through the years by the majority of people. To negatively judge or evaluate the minority idea is labeled a hate crime.

Homosexual relationships have always been present to some extent in our society, for whatever personal or social reasons. They have been tolerated and allowed as a necessary condition for some.

Violence or disrespectful behaviors toward homosexuals or any minority group are inappropriate.

Consequences predominate.

Ideas and behaviors must be evaluated and judged by the consequences they produce for the persons involved and for the larger society.

It is now being promoted that homosexual behaviors should be taught to our children as equally appropriate social relationships.

It is not useful, appropriate or wise to use exceptions to argue for or define normality.

The normalization of homosexuality in society would create profound changes in social organization that warrant caution and serious consideration. Heterosexual marriage is a foundation for personal and social integration between the sexes and generations.

The traditional family preserves and passes down its unique cultural values to the next generation, providing checks and balances in society which guard against destructive extremism. The greatest sources of nurture, support and meaning for the majority of Americans are found within intergenerational family relationships.

Personal health risks associated with homosexual behaviors are deeply troubling. The American Medical Association confirms that homosexual youth are 23 times more apt to contact a sexually transmitted disease than their heterosexual counterparts.

Protecting democracy!

The concept of 'equality of persons' is not to be equated with the insistence that every idea or behavior of a minority or small group should be used to determine what all others must accept or abide by.

Democracy requires responsible debate and consideration of behavioral and social consequences when changes in social relationships are proposed.

This process is the best way to ensure well being for the larger good and to ensure protection and support for all citizens.

(15) The Consequences: The Gay Battle for Social Reorganization of America

2010-04-09T17:05:00.000-07:00

SOCIAL CONSEQUENCES OF NORMALIZING SAME-SEX MARRIAGE 1.

In considering the future of marriage, Dr. David Blankenhorn chaired three one-day seminars for researchers and family scholars in 2004 to address concerns raised by the prospect of gay marriage. Seminars were held in New York City, Washington D.C., and Atlanta, Georgia, with a total of 40 people attending, including leading family scholars. Some had spoken out in favor of gay marriage and some against. Serious scholars and leaders wrestled with the issue in an attempt to see both sides.

The results of the discussions confirmed that a movement toward gay marriage would not only affect a small minority but would constitute major social change. It became evident that the decision was not a morally easy one because when important goods conflict, any resolution will carry elements of loss. A diverse range of consequences were listed, both positive and negative.

Positive social consequences of extending marriage benefits to same-sex couples included:

* the improvement of well being and social worth for gays and lesbians,

* increased tolerance under the law,

* and equal treatment under the law.

Extending marriage benefits may:

* encourage gays to choose committed relationships,

* contribute to more stability and longer lasting relationships,

* and lead to less sexual promiscuity.

Negative social consequences that were identified in changing the public meaning of marriage from a social institution to a private relationship between two people included:

* the de-institutionalization of marriage, contributing to a social devaluation of marriage,

* endorsement of the idea that a child does not really need a mother and a father,

* opening the door to other forms of 'marriage', including group marriage and polygamy,

* subsidization of reproductive technologies,

* and fewer children being raised by their own married mother and father.

The religious values of most Americans in regard to appropriate sexual relationships would:

* no longer be legally accepted,

* lead to state imposed restrictions on religious freedom and freedom of expression,

* and lead to U.S. marriages becoming secularized, undermining religious conceptions of marriage.

The public socialization of young people into a marriage culture would be diluted to avoid suggesting that marriage is fundamentally heterosexual. If the decision was reached by the courts, a public loss in confidence in the judicial systems would result.

The total list of consequences identified by the 40 conference attendees included 23 negative, 24 positive and 12 'other' consequences that were considered important to recognize. The participants in this discussion concluded that gay marriage would represent "quite a bit of significant social change, affecting many aspects of society."

QUESTIONS ON GAY REORGANIZATION OF SOCIETY 2.

In 1993, Morton A. Kaplan, distinguished service professor of political science emeritus at the University of Chicago and editor of The World and I magazine, wrestled with the challenges to society being proposed by gay activism. Noting that the issues of gay rights and alternative family forms generated enormous anger and political energy, he concluded that, "As long as the family, as now understood, commands the rational and emotional assent of most people, it is hard for homosexuality to enter the mainstream of American life." Noting that "We cannot, even if we wished, withdraw from these issues" Kaplan concluded, "it is therefore, quite important to think through these issues as objectively as possible."

A series of considerations were raised.

* "Many homosexuals and lesbians are intelligent, honorable, hardworking, and valuable members of society. Many of them are fine parents...They tend to greater promiscuity than heterosexuals, but this may be a product of social and legal factors..."

* "No decent individual would desire to see homosexuals harassed or deprived of dignified career opportunities."

* "Although it is regrettable that a group of people should pay disproportionate social and psychological costs because of their sexuality, the survival of the larger group cannot be put at risk."

* "We legitimate the heterosexual family to preserve the group."

* In extending the concept of normality, "damage may be done to society that may take generations to repair...some degree of damage to limited groups of individuals may be justified for the greater good of society... every set of social norms injures some."

* "Are homosexual and lesbian tendencies genetically governed?...such behavior likely depends on more than genetics."

* "...there were also incestuous or pedophilic families...But where is the line to be drawn, and on what basis? And, if we cannot draw a firm line, will we remain successful in outlawing child pornography if the child consents?"

* Can we tolerate all forms of consensual sexual activity"... Our ability to function rationally depends on taboos and social and legal constraints that maintain character and a sense of appropriateness."

* I suggest prudence, that we do not allow a slippery slope to take us unawares... we need serious discussion rather than the polemics and the heat we are now generating."

CAUTION IS WISDOM

Social movements promoting the normalization of homosexuality in our society have, and will continue to bring about profound challenges and changes in social organization, particularly in regard to social integration, social reproduction, social health, and the intergenerational transfer of cultural values.

Social Integration

The heterosexual family unit has integrated men and women, children, grandparents and extended relatives in personal and caring relationships that transcend generations. Countless and consistent family research confirms that the greatest sources of nurture, support and meaning for the majority of Americans are found within the family unit.

Intergenerational Transfer of Cultural Values

The foundation upon which freedom is built rests upon the ability of autonomous family units to preserve and pass down cultural values to the next generation. This process develops a diversity of perspectives, providing the checks and balances in society which guard against destructive extremes.

Social Reproduction

As children are taught to accept homosexuality as a normal choice, the intergenerational transfer of cultural and genetic patterns in society becomes jeopardized. The normalization of homosexuality will create new forms of social reproduction. When society changes rapidly it is prudent to inquire, "Who benefits?" The commercialization of reproduction through the buying of sperm and egg and the creating of children through deliberate planning by professionals (at high cost) will replace the caring and loving union of mother, father, children, grandchildren, and extended relatives. This is a foundation for eugenics with all the questions to be asked in this regard. Whose sperm? Whose egg will be favored?

Social Health

The personal and public health risks associated with homosexual behaviors are deeply troubling. It is not useful to pretend that the dangers inherent in the homosexual lifestyle will be overcome by condom use, especially a careless distribution of condoms among the young.

Heterosexual family forms have been protected and passed down through centuries of civilizations and in virtually all societies.

The Slippery Slope

This discussion will leave the reader with questions addressed by Melik Kaylan in his article "The Way We Live Now." 3.

"...Most of the 'slippery slope' warnings of the last decades have proved tragically accurate despite the mockery that silenced them. From the domino theory, to drugs, divorce, to permissive sexuality, who can deny the devastation wrought by each -broken homes, addictions, AIDS?...

Already the era of gay parenting is here. It often involves an affluent gay couple adopting poor orphans and improving their material future immeasurably. How long before market forces noisily hold up such families as role models, pillars of style, tolerance, humor, free-thinking? Yet we have no idea how the children will fare emotionally, how anomalous they will feel... Will children, once reared know how to sustain a heterosexual marriage or family, having no inherited sense of its workings?...What will be the ultimate human cost, and who will have the courage, then to identify the cause?"

References:

1. Blankenhorn, David. The Future of Marriage. New York: Encounter Books. 2007:202-212.

2. Kaplan, Morton A. "Common Sense on Gay Rights." The World and I. 1993:361,403-407.

3. Kaylan, Melik. "TheWay We Live Now." The Wall Street Journal. Friday, August 8, 2003: Opinion Page.

(14) Politics and Beyond: The Gay Battle for Social Reorganization of America

2010-04-06T16:47:00.000-07:00

Gays in Power

Politics involves the ability of interest groups to effect social and legal decisions in favor of their preferred results. Out.com notes that "influential gays are becoming increasingly more visible and more powerful." The Power 50: The Most Powerful Gay Men and Women in America were outed on their website. Four criteria were used to determine their choices, including; political clout, pop-culture resonance, individual wealth, and current personal profile.

Descriptions of their first five choices are listed as follows: 1.

1. David Giffen is a $4 billion Hollywood entertainment powerhouse. His money has bought him influence over Democratic presidential politics and his name on UCLA's medical school.

2. Anderson Cooper, as anchor of CNN News, pulls a $4 million salary.

3. Ellen DeGeneres hosts her own talk show that draws 2.3 million viewers on a daily basis. This out and proud lesbian is reportedly worth $65 million.

4. Tim Gill is the country's biggest gay political donor who made his fortune as founder of the publishing software Quark.

5. Barney Frank, Democratic Congressman from Massachusetts, assumed chairmanship of the House Committee on Financial Services when Democrats took control of the House and Senate.

Bankrolling the Battle 2.

Tim Gill, the leading funder of the homosexual agendas, is perhaps the most powerful force for homosexual activism. Gill grew up in Denver and became involved in homosexual activism after enrolling at the university of Colorado at Boulder in the early 1970's. With a passion for computer technology and making money he launched the software company Quark, which became a major international software firm, making Gill a very rich man.

In 1992, Gill refocused on gay activism after the passage of Amendment 2, which prohibited Colorado localities from passing gay-right ordinances. Feeling angry that "the forces of evil are out to destroy us" he began to funnel his wealth to work for pro-homosexual agendas. In 1994, he formed the Gill foundation through which he was able to use his fortune to "seed gay-rights organizations in all 50 states."

His support enabled the Gay, Lesbian and Straight Education Network (GLSEN) to grow into the leading gay-activist group in America's schools. By 2001, USA Today reported that the "Gill Foundation donations to homosexual-rights organizations around the country represented 20 percent of their annual budgets. As of this year, the foundation has made grants of well over $115 million."

Besides huge donations, Gill used creative and effective ways to promote the gay agenda. He launched training seminars across the country to "help the organizations sharpen their message, hone their efficiency and raise money more effectively." To portray homosexuality as mainstream, Gill also gave large grants to symphonies, libraries and colleges with the stipulation that the organization have a non-discrimination policy toward homosexuals and that they advertise through plaques, event programs, and annual reports that the funding came from the Gay & Lesbian Fund of Colorado.

In 2000, Gill became involved in "strategic politics". Focusing on local campaigns, Gill gave $300,000, followed by $800,000, followed by $5 million to influence political races. He recruited three multi-millionaires to join his pro-gay cause: Jared Polis; Rutt Bridges; and billionaire heiress, Pat Stryker, sister to a homosexual billionaire from Michigan, Jon Stryker. The four "Gillionaires" fed money into local races to shift control of legislatures in favor of gay-friendly candidates. In 2006, Gill and his allies targeted 70 state and local races in a dozen states. When Gill funneled $5 million into Colorado politics, Democrats took control of both the House and Senate for the first time in three decades. In New Hampshire, a new Democrat majority passed a civil-unions law. In Iowa, the Republicans lost the House; the Democratic majority was able to stop the state marriage amendment and the Legislature enacted a homosexual nondiscrimination law.

Obama's Rainbow World 3.

When Barack Obama was elected president, lavender, the signature color of the gay movement, became the preferred color of major media newscasters and talk show hosts. Purple and lavender ties, shirts, dresses, and suit coats blossomed. On inauguration Day of 2009 the Human Rights Campaign president, Joe Solmonese said, "Today's inauguration represents a paradigm shift. The pendulum has swung away from the anti-gay forces and toward a new president and vice president who acknowledge our equality."

Throughout his campaign, Obama made it clear that he supported the homosexual "civil rights" movement. Immediately after his inauguration, the Obama White House web site posted it's agenda, which include a section addressed to the lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgendered (LGBT) community. Obama is quoted, "Too often, the issue of LGBT rights is exploited by those seeking to divide us... But at its core, this issue is about who we are as Americans. It's about whether this nation is going to live up to its founding promise of equality by treating all its citizens with dignity and respect."

On the web site (www.whitehouse.gov) Obama spoke to the relevant political concerns:

Hate-Crimes - We will "expand hate crimes protection by passing the Matthew Shepard Act."

ENDA - Obama "supports the Employment Non-Discrimination Act...our anti-discrimination laws should be expanded to include sexual orientation and gender identity."

Gays in the Military - "we need to repeal the 'don't ask, don't tell' policy".

Defense of Marriage Act - the President wants to "repeal the Defense of Marriage Act which was signed into law in 1996 by President Clinton. Obama wants to "enact legislation that would ensure that the 1,100+ federal legal rights and benefits currently provided on the basis of marital status are extended to same-sex couples in civil unions and other legally-recognized unions."

Gay adoption - In a letter to a gay rights group in Massachusetts, Obama said, "We have to eliminate discrimination against LGBT families. And that's why we have to extend equal treatment in our family and adoption laws."

After taking office Obama disappointed many gay activists by not moving aggressively forward in pursuit of gay rights, and even defending some of the policies he criticized. Gay rights groups became outraged when the Obama administration filed a legal brief defending the Defense of Marriage Act, which Obama had opposed during his campaign. To lessen the anger, In June of 2009 Obama signed a presidential memo extending some benefits to same-sex partners of federal employees. 4.

In February of 2010, Obama again disappointed homosexuals who were wanting to serve openly in the armed forces. Michael Mullen, the Joint Chiefs of Staff Adm, reported that the Pentagon is conducting a year long review of policy change. President Obama and Congress will table this issue for the rest of the year. 5.

REFERENCES

1. Out.com. "The Power 50: The Most Powerful Gay Men & Women in America." http://out.com/detail.asp?id=22394. 2/26/10.

2. Paulton, John. "In the Image of Gill". Citizen magazine. Focus on the Family. Vol. 21, No. 12. December, 2007:24-27.

3. Vitagliano, Ed. "Homosexual Agenda." American Family Association Journal. Vol. 33, No. 3, March 2009:20-21.

4. Froomkin, Dan. "Consolation Prize for Gays." 6/17/2009. http://voices.washingtonpost.com/white-house-watch/a-consolation-prize-for-gays_pf.html. 2/26/2010.

5. The Washington Times. "Editorial: Obama disappoints gays again." Feb. 3, 2010. http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2010/feb/o3/homosexuals-disappointed-again. 2/26/2010.

(13) Gays Confront the Church: The Gay Battle for Social Reorganization of America

2010-03-30T19:27:00.000-07:00

Although prostitution and homosexuality were sometimes included in practices of early religions, the moral commandments of the Hebrew people protected sexual relationships in support of family values. The formation of the family unit through the love and sexual union of a man and a woman was seen as the way in which the love of God was shown to individuals in the present and passed on to future generations through their children. Scriptures from the Jewish Bible and the New Testament supported husband/wife unions and condemned homosexual relationships.

When gay activist groups emerged in the 1960's, churches were challenged to include homosexuals and allow them to participate without discrimination in church activities and events. Fundamental groups held firm to scriptural guidance, while mainline churches, especially within the leadership of the denominations, were moving toward inclusion.

Churches Challenged

The Southern Baptists, the largest Protestant denomination with sixteen million members, was not without challenge in its effort to preserve conservative family values. In 1965 Anne and Fred Alexander, members of the Southern Baptist Church, started the publication of The Other Side magazine "to keep alive the possibility of fundamental change." In 1978 The Other Side published an issue dealing with homosexuality, which included groundbreaking articles offering gay and lesbian speakers the opportunity to express their feelings and experiences. 1.

Organized elements within the mainline Protestant churches began a systematic push to change thinking related to theological and ethical issues involving sexuality. In 1978 a Task Force on Homosexuality submitted a report to the General Assembly of the Presbyterian Church USA (PCUSA) recommending that avowed practicing homosexuals be ordained as ministers, ruling elders, and deacons. The 1978 General Assembly of PCUSA declared homosexual behaviors contrary to scripture and persons who practiced it could not be ordained. In 1978 the General Assembly appointed a seventeen-member committee, heavily weighted with members who condoned homosexuality, to develop a study on human sexuality. The report repudiated scriptural morality and proposed legitimizing premarital, extramarital, and homosexual relationships. The Human Sexuality Report was rejected by 94% of the delegation at the 1991 PCUSA General Assembly. A committee moderator stated, "We are convinced that the issue raised by this report will not go away." 2.

In 2006 a report titled "A Season of Discernment" that devoted 100 pages to "Sexuality and Ordination" was passed by the General Assembly of PCUSA. Agreement was reached on some matters. While ordination would be denied to anyone who demonstrated licentious behavior, celibate homosexuals and bisexuals were not barred from consideration for ordination. Every ordaining body was given the opportunity to decide what departures can be tolerated. 3.

Aggressive Attacks on the Church

In December of 1989 the late Cardinal John O'Connor was beginning his sermon in New York City's St. Patrick's Cathedral when angry shouts came from the congregation. Members of the militant homosexual group ACT-UP stretched themselves out in the aisles or chained themselves to the pews. An angry man yelled, "You bigot, O'Connor, you're killing us." Forty-three protesters were arrested while O'Connor tried to go on with the service.

In 1992 the voters of Colorado had passed Amendment 2 that denied homosexuals special legal privileges. Will Perkins, the man who helped get Amendment 2 on the Colorado ballot, attended the Village Seven Presbyterian Church. In the middle of a Sunday service in 1993 a dozen homosexual activists leaped out of their seats and bombarded the parishioners with condoms. Focus on the Family in Colorado had rocks thrown through the windows, dead animal parts left on the ministry's front door, and flyers posted on light poles in front of the ministry and throughout the downtown area calling for conservative Christians to be thrown to the lions. 4.

Soulforce, Inc: We Will Split You

Soulforce, Inc. was a roving protest group of multi-denominational gays, lesbians and transgendered persons committed to nonviolent action with a goal to challenge church doctrines on homosexuality. The organization was founded in 1998 by the Rev. Mel White who had co-authored books in the 1980's with Evangelical elites including Billy Graham, Jerry Falwell and Pat Robertson. After 25 years of trying to 'cure' himself, the father of two left his wife and moved in with his male partner. In the summer of 2000, protests were organized to disrupt the general assemblies of the Methodist, Baptist, and Episcopalian denominations. Working with activists within the denominations, Soulforce staged demonstrations. White's attitude was "We don't debate anymore. Change your policies or we're going to split you apart and leave." 5.

Denominations Divided

The demonstrations brought fervent opposition from evangelical forces within the churches. The vote by the delegates at the 2000 annual conference of the United Methodist Church rejected by a two-thirds majority any effort to alter the denominations's marriage centered sexual morality or sexual standards for ordination. 6.

Episcopalians were also divided by the debates on homosexuality. In 1998 conservative members formed a reform movement called Concerned Clergy and Laity of the Episcopal Church. In 2003 the election of a partnered homosexual bishop created turmoil in the church. The 2009 General Convention adopted two resolutions that seriously departed from biblical sexuality by repealing a moratorium on the consecration of additional gay bishops, while opening the doors to blessing same-sex unions. 7.

In August of 2009 the Evangelical Lutheran Church in American (ELCA) adopted policies that were a departure from traditional Christian teaching. "The new policies allow ELCA churches to give approval to non-marital sexual relationships, both homosexual and heterosexual, and to ordain persons in such relationships." 8.

Priestly Sexual Abuse Challenges the Church

Accusations of priestly pedophilia exploded in the Catholic Church in the 1980's. The dual system of sexuality within the Catholic Church created problems in the development of a consistent understanding of sexuality. Church leaders for centuries have been called to celibacy. However seminary training did not adequately address the realities of leading a sexually celibate life. A church sponsored panel reported that 2 to 4% of Catholic priests may have been guilty of sexually abusing children, mostly teen boys. 9.

Many Catholic seminaries have a gay subculture. R. Scott Appleby, professor of history at Notre Dame University, said "People I know quite well have left the seminary either in disgust because people are not keeping their vows, or in alienation because they're not gay." 10

AIDS has taken a toll among Catholic priests. By the beginning of the new millennium, hundreds of Catholic priests had died of AIDS-related illnesses, and hundreds more were living with HIV. Priests were dying of AIDS at a rate four times that of the general population. 11.

Priestly sexual abuse of children and young teens raises two questions.

1. How many young boys were drawn into the homosexual lifestyle by early experiences of sexual behaviors with priests.?

2. To what extent has the homosexual challenge to traditional family patterns been supported and encouraged through these behaviors?

These questions become especially relevant in light of the high rate of AIDS among the priesthood.

ENDA and Hate Crimes Challenges Religious Liberty

Since 1994, the Employment Non-Discrimination Act (ENDA) has been repeatedly introduced in Congress. If the bill passes, 'sexual orientation' would be added to the list of federally protected classes under the 1964 act that prohibits job discrimination on the basis of race, color, religion, sex or national origin. ENDA would make it illegal to make decisions on hiring, firing, promoting or paying an employee based on sexual orientation. Supporters argue that ENDA is necessary to protect a minority from discrimination while opponents argue that religious employers who disagree with the homosexual lifestyle would be discriminated against. Church related facilities or non-profits could lost their tax exempt status if they refused to hire a person on the basis of their sexual orientation. 12.

After a decade of political struggle, President Obama signed the federal hate crime bill into law on Oct 28th of 2009. A hate crime is identified as a crime of violence motivated by the hatred of the group to which the victim belongs. The federal hate crime protects against violence based on the race, color, religion, national origin, gender, disability, sexual orientation, and gender identity of the victim.

BACKLASH- Protecting Religious Liberties

When church leadership moved toward changing sexual expectations to include practicing homosexuals as clergy and leaders, church members who leaned toward maintaining a scriptural foundation to the faith voted with their feet. Between 1965 and 1989 six mainline denominations (Evangelical Lutheran, United Methodist, United Church of Christ, Episcopal, Presbyterian, and Disciples of Christ) reported a combined membership loss of 6.2 million members. The churches that increased in membership were conservative and evangelical, in contrast to the secular liberalism of mainline denominations. 13.

Tony Perkins, President of the Family Research Council contends that state-sanctioned same-sex unions pose a dangerous threat to religious liberties, not just for churches but for everyone. Heterosexual relationships, although the only relationships that can naturally reproduce, would be officially declared 'nothing special'. Non-discrimination laws would threaten the rights of individual believers trying to live their daily lives in accordance to their faith. 14,

Perkins lists ways in which individuals may be challenged in their faith or denied the right to express their personal religious values.

* Individuals would be denied the right to express their views in regard to the gay lifestyle in public.

* Private business owners would be required to provide benefits for same-sex domestic partners.

* Organizations that challenged same-sex relationships may be denied government grants.

* Organizations may be denied access to public events.

* Professionals may face lawsuits or be denied licensing.

* Religious non-profits or educational establishments may lose their tax-exempt status.

* Religious clubs at secular universities may be denied recognition.

* Private business owners and religious non-profits would be required to include gays as employees.

Perkins notes occasions in which these conditions have already occurred.

* Catholic charities in Boston were told they could no longer do adoptions if they refused to place children with same-sex couples.

* A fertility doctor was sued for refusing to artificially inseminate a lesbian.

* A Christian camp meeting lost it's tax-exempt status for refusing to rent their pavilion for a lesbian 'civil union' ceremony.

* A Lutheran school in California was sued for expelling two girls in a lesbian relationship.

The late Dr. D. James Kennedy, founder of Coral Ridge Ministries, sounded the alarm on the federal hate crime law, which is named after Matthew Shepherd. Shepherd, who was a homosexual, was brutally pistol whipped and left tied to a split-rail fence in Laramie, Wyoming by two thugs in an attempt to get money and drugs. Homosexual protesters turned the tragic event into an attack against the Christian community, claiming that anti-gay messages by Christians who opposed homosexuality contributed to the 1998 murder of Shepherd.

Hate crimes add additional penalties for crimes committed against homosexuals or other designated groups when hatred or bias is a motivating factor.

Dr. Kennedy contended that "hate crime laws have been used to silence Christians, while providing special protection to homosexuals." 15.

Opponents of hate crime laws argue that the legislation leads to criminalizing speech that opposes the homosexual lifestyle. Current laws punish behaviors while hate crime laws punish offenders for what they think or say. In 2004 eleven Christians were arrested for committing a hate crime when they preached at a homosexual gay-pride event in Philadelphia. Matt Barber, Director for Cultural Affairs with Liberty Counsel, calls hate crime legislation "Constitutionally dubious and dangerous to religious liberties and freedom of speech" and "entirely unnecessary."

16.

REFERENCES

1. Davidson, Doug. "Disturbing the Peace:Thirty years on The Other Side." The Other Side. 30th Anniversary . Vol. 31, No. 6 (Nov/Dec) 1995:7.

2. Presbyterian Layman. "Highlights from the Layman's years of reporting on Presbyterian Church (USA)." Vol. 28, No. 6 (Nov/Dec) 1995.

Jameson, Vic. "Assembly maintains traditional Presbyterian sexuality policies." Presbyterian Survey. (July/Aug) 1991:24-25.

3. Religious Tolerance. "Statement on homosexuality: 2000 to now." 2008. http://www,religioustolerance.org/hom_pru22.htm. 2/22/2010.

4. Sears, Alan & Craig Osten. The Homosexual Agenda: Exposing the Principal Threat to Religious Freedom Today. (Revised and updated) Nashville,TN: B&H Publishing. 2003:127,156.

5. Van Biema, David. "Out of the Fold.". Time. Vol. 156, No. 1 (July 3) 2000:48-51.

6. Tooley, Mark. "United Methodists move to the center." Faith and Freedom. Vol. 19, No. 3-4 (Summer/Fall)2000:6-7.

7. Walton, Jeffrey H. "Episcopalians Roll Down the Slope". Faith and Freedom. Vol. 28, No. 4. Fall 2009:7.

8. Wisdom. Alan F. H. "Evangelical Lutherans Go Over the Edge." Faith and Freedom. Vol. 28, No. 4, Fall 2009:6.

9. Associated Press. "Catholic bishops urge new rules over sex abuse." San Antonio Express News. November 18, 1993:15A.

10. Sears, Alan & Craig Osten, 2003:152.

11. Thomas, Judy L. "AIDS taking toll among Catholic priests in U.S." San Antonio Express News. Sat., Feb. 5, 2000:10B.

12. Riley, Jennifer. "Gay Employment Bill on Queue for Returning Congress." Aug. 21, 2009. http://www.christianpost.com/article/20090821/gay-employment-bill-on-agenda... 2/21/2010.

13. Ostling, Richard N. "The Church Search." Time. Vol. 141, No. 14 (April 5) 1993.44-51.

14. Perkins, Tony. "Same-sex 'Marriage' vs. 'Religious Liberty." Truth & Triumph. Alliance Defense Fund. Vol. II, Issue 3. 2009:14-15.

15. Kennedy, D. James. "CRM Sounds Alarm on Hate Crime Laws." IMPACT. Vol.XX, No. 10. Coral Ridge Ministries. 2008

16. Ibid

(12) Moving Toward Marriage: The Gay Battle for Social Reorganization of America

2010-03-27T14:32:00.000-07:00

"We're here, we're queer, we're redefining the term 'family'." A 1992 study reported that 55% of gay men and 71% of lesbians were in committed or steady relationships. However, they were unable to marry and obtain the legal benefits of marriage, including insurance coverage as spouse and access to the hospital to visit a dying partner. Seeking to change this, lesbians and gay men created their own weddings and ceremonies. In 1993 at the third March on Washington for Lesbian, Gay, and Bisexual Rights three-thousand couples gathered for a mass wedding. That same year the Hawaii Supreme Court, in response to an appeal from a lower court decision denying marriage licenses to gay and lesbian couples, ruled that the prohibition of same-sex marriages constituted discrimination and was probably unconstitutional. 1.

The Lambda Legal Defense and Educational Fund had worked to lay a groundwork for winning the right for gays to marry. In 1995 they announced the formation of its Marriage Project to serve as a national coordinator and clearinghouse. A network of volunteer attorneys, law professors, and law students were mobilized to research legal arguments against backlash. The Project developed the Marriage Resolution:

"Because marriage is a fundamental right under our Constitution, and because the Constitution guarantees equal protection under the law, RESOLVED, the State should permit gay and lesbian couples to marry and share fully and equally in the rights and responsibilities of marriage." 2.

Federal and State Defense of Marriage Acts

When Hawaii became the first state to move toward gay marriage, other states and the Federal Government wrestled with the possibility that through the U.S. Constitution's "full faith and credit" clause they would be required to recognize same-sex marriages performed in Hawaii. In 1996 Congress adopted the federal Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) with votes of 342 to 67 in the House and 85 to 14 in the Senate. DOMA was signed by President Clinton on Sept. 21, 1996. DOMA refined marriage for purposes of federal law. The "word 'marriage' means only a legal union between one man and one woman as husband and wife, and the word 'spouse' refers only to a person of the opposite sex who is a husband or a wife." 3.

In 1998, the Hawaiian movement toward same-sex marriage was rescinded when Hawaii and Alaska passed constitutional amendments supported by approximately 70% of the voters in each state to ensure that marriage could not be redefined by judges in the court system. 4.

In July of 2000 Vermont became the first U.S. state to recognize homosexual 'unions', marriages in virtually every legal sense. By May of 2001 80% of gay-union licenses had gone to nonresidents. Other states were concerned that gay activists would travel to Vermont, get 'married', return home and sue for legal recognition of their status. Many states made efforts to protect marriage from legal assault by passing a state Defense of Marriage Act. 5.

Promoting a Constitutional Amendment

Following a decision in June of 2003 by the U.S. Supreme Court striking down the nation's sodomy laws, the highest court in Massachusetts ruled, 4 to 3, in November of 2003 that same-sex marriage was permissible under the State's Constitution.

A growing concern developed about having courts set social agendas that hadn't been approved by the legislatures. Because of a concern that same-sex marriage activists would encourage federal courts to intervene in the debate over marriage to remove state law barriers to same-sex marriage, a movement developed in support for an amendment to the U.S. Constitution to ban gay marriages. A New York Times/CBS News poll in 2003 found that 55 % of Americans favored an amendment to the Constitution that would allow marriage only between a man and a woman.

Rep. Marilyn Musgrave, R-Colo., with 106 co-sponsors, introduced a constitutional amendment in the House in May of 2003, although the measure in the Senate had only a few supporters. Musgrave said,"...if the definition of marriage is to be changed, it should be done by the American people, not four judges in Massachusetts." President Bush voiced support saying, "I will support a constitutional amendment which would honor marriage between a man and a woman." 6.

State Scorecard on Same-Sex Marriage

By November of 2008, 37 states had established their own Defense of Marriage Acts, and 30 states had constitutional amendments protecting traditional marriage. The constitutional amendments to protect marriage as a union between one man and one woman were passed by typically large margins, crossing party lines. The vote passed in fifteen states by majorities between 70 and 86%. The vote passed in twenty-eight states by majorities of 55% or above.

By January of 2010, forty-one states prohibited same-sex marriage. 7.

However, same-sex marriage was gaining acceptance. As of early 2010, 6 states and the District of Columbia allowed same-sex marriage, although no state had legalized gay marriage by referendum of the people. Decisions by the State Supreme Court of Massachusetts (2003), Connecticut (2008) and Iowa (2009) ruled affirmatively on the legality of same-sex marriage.

In 2009, Vermont, Maine and New Hampshire passed same-sex marriage bills through legislative action. In November of 2009 the District of Columbia approved a same-sex marriage bill. 8.

Arguing for Gay Marriage

Jonathan Rauch's book Gay Marriage argues in favor of gay marriage. He writes, "I would say that marriage is two people's lifelong commitment, recognized by law and society to care for each other."..."They promise to look after each other and their children so society won't have to; in exchange, society deems them a family and provides an assortment of privileges, obligations, and caregiving tools...The example gay couples set by marrying instead of shacking up might even strengthen marriage itself." 9.

Other proponents of gay marriage fail to agree with Rauch about the importance of marriage as a social institution. Sociologist Judith Stacey views marriage as a flawed and dangerous institution. Her strategy is to deconstruct marriage's 'customary forms': marriage as between a man and a woman; marriage as between two people; and marriage as connected to sexuality and procreation. Many activists seek to deinstitutionalize marriage and weaken its public influence as an important step to larger goals. Ellen Willis, a professor at New York University, foresees other changes. "For starters, if homosexual marriage is OK, why not group marriage." 10.

BACKLASH to Same-Sex Marriage

David Blankenhorn, a family scholar and researcher, is the founder and president of the Institute for American Values, an academic think tank dealing with the importance of families. In his book, The Future of Marriage he challenges the movement toward gay marriages. He writes, "Marriage is fundamentally about the needs of children...What children need most are mothers and fathers. Not caregivers, Not parent-like adults...the mother and the father who together made the child, who love the child, and who love each other... Redefining marriage to include gay and lesbian couples would eliminate entirely in law, and weaken still further in culture, the basic idea of a mother and a father for every child... Once this proposed reform becomes law, even to say the words out loud in public ...would probably be viewed as explicitly divisive and discriminatory, possibly even as hate speech." 11.

In November of 2009 the National Organization for Marriage under the leadership of Rick Santorum and Maggie Gallagher invited the American people to join the Two Million for Marriage Campaign to tell Congress: "Enough, Don't Mess with Marriage!" The concern focused on a bill introduced by Congressman Jerrold Nadler to repeal the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA). Santorum notes, "If we don't act today, President Obama, Nancy Pelosi, and others in Congress will succeed in their efforts to repeal DOMA, an effort which the White House has already noted is one of its highest 'civil rights' priorities."

Dr. James Dobson, founder of Focus on The Family, donated $25,000 to the National Organization for Marriage. He said, "It's not just marriage that is at stake; it's absolutely everything." 12.

REFERENCES

1. The Gay Almanac. Compiled by the National Museum & Archive of Lesbian and Gay History. New York: Berkley Books. 1996:231,235.

2. Ibid:258.

3. Advocate.com. "Hawaii Gay Marriage, 10 years later." http://www.advocate.com/printArticle.aspx?id=102704. Nov. 20, 2009.

Goldberg, Carey. "Hawaii Judge Ends Gay-Marriage Ban." New York Times (NYTime.com)

December 4,1996.

DOMA Watch. "Federal Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA)" Alliance Defense Fund. 2008.

http://www.domawatch.org/about/federaldoma.html. 2/17/1020.

4. Daniels, Matt. "United, We Fall". World magazine. Vol. 15, No. 24, June 17, 2000:65-67.

5. Daniels, Matt. Ibid.

Drummond, Tammerlin. "The Marrying Kind". Time. Vol. 157, No. 19. May 14, 2001:52.

6. Seelye, Katharine Q. and Janet Elder. "Discomfort over gays seen on rise. San Antonio

Express News. Sunday, December 21, 2003:15A.

7. Buss, Dale. "Gay activists seek to repeal state marriage amendments in U.S." Citizen. Vol. 23, No. 10. Dec. 2009:8.

8. Fitzpatrick, Laura. "Spotlight - Same-Sex Marriage." Time. Vol. 175, No. 3. Jan.25, 2010:20.

9. Blankenhorn, David. The Future of Marriage. New York: Encounter Books. 2007:xii.

10. Ibid:130-137.

11. Ibid:2-3.

12. Santorum, Rick. National Organization for Marriage. www.TwoMillionForMarriage.com. Nov. 2009.

(11)Gay Adoption: The Gay Battle for Social Reorganization of America

2010-03-25T17:55:00.000-07:00

A study done in 1993 indicated that there were 3-8 million lesbian or gay parents raising 6-14 million children in the United States. While most were children from a former heterosexual relationship or marriage, a growing number were opting to become parents through commercial reproductive services or adoption. 1.

Adoption becomes controversial

A March 2007 study reported that 65,000 adopted children were being raised in the U.S. by same-sex parents and an estimated 14,100 foster children were living with one or more gay or lesbian foster parents. States differ in their laws for single gays and lesbians and same-sex couples who seek to adopt.

*Florida is the only state that bans gay adoption by both singles and couples but it does allow gays to become foster parents.

* Arkansas, Utah and Virginia prohibit all singles or unmarried couples from adopting a child.

* California, Connecticut, Illinois, Massachusetts, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, and the District of Columbia have laws permitting gay, lesbian, bisexual or transgendered (GLBT) single, joint or second parent adoptions.

* Colorado permits same-sex couple adoptions while also allowing grandparents and other people who are raising a child to adopt.

Many states do not have specific laws covering gay adoptions or foster parenting. Gay singles have an easier time adopting than do gay couples. Twenty states permit single GLBT adoptions but are unclear in regard to joint adoptions. In these states gay couples wishing to adopt or foster a child are at the mercy of judges and adoption agencies. The Evan B. Donaldson Adoption Institute, a non-profit organization that studies adoption and foster care claims that about 60 percent of adoption agencies accept applications from gays and lesbians, but they often are confronted with prejudice during the process 2.

Rob Calhoun and his partner, Clay Calhoun, have two adopted children, a 4 year-old daughter and an 18 month old son. Calhoun said, "We're not moms, we're not heterosexual, we're not biological parents... But we're totally equal and just as loving as female parents, as straight parents, and biological parents. Love makes a family, not biology or gender." 3.

BACKLASH/ Americans divided

A 2006 Pew Research Center poll reported that 46 percent of Americans support gay and lesbian adoptions. Opponents argue that children raised in gay or lesbian households suffer from not having both a mother and a father. Others argue that there are millions of single heterosexual mothers and fathers raising children across the country. They question why children of single or same-sex couples would be worse off.

Dr. James Dobson, founder of Focus on the Family, wrote in a commentary for Time magazine.

"Love alone is not enough to guarantee healthy growth and development...The two most loving women in the world cannot provide a daddy for a little boy, any more than the two most loving men can be complete role models for a little girl." 4,

The Catholic Church opposes gay adoption. On the Catechism on Call website, Robert Fry speaks for the church in saying, "A child who grows up with a mother and a father is exposed to both the masculine and the feminine, which according to God's plan, allows that child to grow up with an intimate and connected experience to both sexes. A boy, for example, raised by two women is deprived of the right to learn what society expects of men, and how men are expected to handle the challenges they will face in that society. A woman cannot transmit this knowledge to a child! You can't pass on what you don't know! Every child has a right to a mother and a father...Two men, for example, who choose to adopt a little boy, make a conscious decision that this boy will never have a mother. The situation is much worse when artificial insemination is involved, and the father's role is reduced simply to that of being a 'sperm donor'...To think that we've now decided to tamper with this foundation of our civilization, just so that a minority of adults can have their lifestyle sanctioned and codified as both normal and even 'healthy' should concern us all." 5.

The Catholic Church has been highly involved in adoption services. Changes in legislation which prohibit discrimination based on sexual orientation places in jeopardy the ability of the church to continue offering this family service. Tony Perkins, president of the Family Research Council, is deeply concerned about how same-sex legislation will effect religious liberty in the country. He reports, "When Catholic Charities in Boston insisted that they would stay true to principle and refuse to place children for adoption with same-sex couples, they were told by the Commonwealth that they could no longer do adoptions at all." 6.

REFERENCES

1.The Gay Almanac. Compiled by the National Museum & Archive of Lesbian and Gay History. New York:Berkley Books, 1996:232.

2. Gandossy, Taylor. "Gay adoption: A new take on the American Family". http://www. cnn.com/2007/US/06/25/gay.adoption.

Johnson, Ramon. "Where is Gay Adoption Legal?" http://gaylife.about.com/od/gayparentingadoption/a/gaycoupleadopt.htm?p=1. 2/11/2010.

3. Gandossy.

4. Ibid.

5. Fry, Robert. "Learn What the Catholic Church Really Teaches: Catholic Church and Adoption." http://wwwcatechismoncall.wordpress.com/2009/04/16/catholic-church-gay-adoption/. 2/11/2010/

6. Perkins, Tony. "Same-Sex 'Marriage' vs. Religious Liberty." Truth & Triumph. Alliance Defense Fund. Vol. 11, Issue 3. 2009:14-15.

(10)Gay Reproduction: The Gay Battle for Social Reorganization of America

2010-03-20T19:15:00.000-07:00

Reshaping the Superstructure

Marxism became politically correct in American universities in the 1960's. The universities became radicalized. Religious faith and traditions were questioned and dismissed as authority for modern society. Marx contended that the framework of society was not determined by spiritual absolutes, but was rather determined by material conditions. The material conditions available through technology, identified by Marx as the infrastructure, were the determining factors responsible for shaping social relationships, identified by Marx as the superstructure. The superstructure of politics, family, religion, and education, were to be reshaped progressively to change in support of the prevailing conditions of technology and material means of production.

Marx summarized his theory of historical materialism. "The mode of production in material life determines the general character of the social, political and spiritual processes of life...At a certain stage of their development, the material forces of production in society come into conflict with the existing relations of production...Then comes the period of social revolution. With the change of the economic foundation, the entire immense superstructure is more or less rapidly transformed." 1.

Reproductive Technologies Challenge the Traditional Family

The developing science of reproductive technology presented many questions about the future of social, ethical, and family practices that drastically and dramatically changed the moral and relationship variables of human life. At the beginning of the 20th Century a small band of doctors began to experiment with artificial insemination. In the 1920's Margaret Sanger, concerned about eugenics and planned reproduction, organized what was to become the Planned Parenthood Federation. The Great Depression and the World Wars slowed down movements for social change.

When the pill was introduced in 1960, times had changed. Universities increased their advancement into the science of reproduction. Medical students were able to make cash by donating sperm for $50 a pop. The commercialization of reproduction developed when the first for-profit sperm bank opened its doors in Minnesota in 1970.

In 1979 fewer than 10% of infertility doctors would provide sperm to single women. In 1982 the Sperm Bank of California was created to provide sperm to unmarried and heterosexual singles and lesbian women. The sperm, delivered to their door in a liquid nitrogen tank, could be taken to their doctor for insertion, or they could do it themselves with a turkey baster. 2.

Egg donation became commercialized in 1984. Egg donation and surrogacy offered the possibility for a man to create a family. In the 1990's homosexual couples began to use surrogacy in what was labeled a "gayby" boom when a West Los Angeles company, Growing Generations began helping gay men become fathers. 3

The bottom line of business is "Expand the market." In the summer of 2004, R Family Vacations became the first travel company dedicated to the gay family market. They organized a family-friendly cruise which included seminars on surrogacy, adoption and artificial insemination for would be parents.4.

Buying egg and sperm became a spectator sport. Catalogs and Web sites became baby brokerage firms with donors' self descriptions of their interests and abilities, their IQ's, and pictures. Buyers could design a baby by selecting an egg and sperm and have it created by in vitro fertilization. The process was not inexpensive. A surrogacy may run from $10,000 to $30,000.5. Fertility doctors charge between $6,000 to $14,000 a cycle for in vitro fertilization and it takes an average of three cycles before conceiving. 6.

Gay couples stepped up to the opportunity to create a child. In 1988 a newspaper article reported 1,000 surrogacy births in the ten years prior, although 2,000 was considered more accurate a number by some experts. 7.

Rights in Conflict 8.

Gay activists want society to adopt a flexible definition of the right to marry and form a family. They embrace the idea that "Adults have the right to marry the person they choose and form the families they choose." Michael Ignatieff, a human rights scholar, endorses the "rights revolution in private life" as simply an outgrowth of the idea of equality and freedom.

David Blankenhorn, a family scholar and founder of the Institute of American Values contends that changing marriage radically changes parenthood. He argues that in community the rights of one group often exist in tension with the rights of others. and the 'right to form the family I choose' bumps up against the rights of children. In 1989 the U.N. Convention on The Rights of the Child , stated, "The child shall be registered immediately after birth and shall have the right from birth to a name, the rights to acquire a nationality, and, as far as possible, the right to know and be cared for by his or her parents."

The U.N. declaration supports the rights of a child to know the mother and father who created him or her. Divorce and unwed childbearing revolutions have created a situation where more and more children are not cared for by their own two natural parents. Because same-sex bonding cannot produce children naturally, reliance on reproductive technologies will increasingly create a situation where children do not even know who their natural parents are. The child's right to a natural biological heritage is denied to him or her.

Blankenhorn argues, "For those who ask 'Where's the harm?' regarding same-sex marriage, here is the inescapable fact:Changing marriage changes parenthood, and changing parenthood in ways that permit and even encourage adults to wipe out the double origin of some children is a threat to all children...When Canada, by way of implementing same-sex marriage, erased the concept of natural parent from basic Canadian law, there was no asterisk saying 'for gay and lesbian couples only'. The idea of the natural parent got wiped out in law for every child and every couple in Canada." The tern 'natural parent' was removed from Canadian law and replaced with the term 'legal parent'.

REFERENCES
1. Aron, Raymond. Main Currents in Sociological Thought. Garden City, NY:Anchor Books.1968:155.
2. Andrews, Lori. The Clone Age: Adventures in the New World of Reproductive Technology. NY:An Owl Bookl/Henry Holt & Co. 1999:87.
3. Ibid:95,120-121.
4. Bly,Laura. "A gay new time:Family cruises, vacations." USA Today. Friday, July 9, 2004:D1.
5. Andrews: 1996:103.
6. Spar, Debora L. The Baby Business: How Money, Science, and Politics DRive the Commerce of Conception. Boston,MA:Harvard Business School Press. 2006:53.
7. The Gay Almanac. Compiled by the National Museum & Archive of Lesbian and Gay History. New York: Berkley Books. 1996:233.
8. Blankenhorn, David. The Future of Marriage. New York: Encounter Books. 2007:183-199.

(9)The Gay Agenda Battles the Military: The Gay Battle for Social Reorganization of America

2010-03-14T19:14:00.000-07:00

The largest employer in the United States is the military, providing people, particularly individuals from poor communities, with jobs, education and other benefits. This avenue for employment has been challenged or denied to gays and lesbians in the United States. Although the military's "don't ask, don't tell" policy does not allow them to serve openly, more than 36,000 gays and lesbians serve actively in the military. Gay men and lesbians are estimated to represent 2.5 percent of active duty personnel.1.

'Unsuitable for military service'

American military law outlining punishment for homosexual soldiers took effect in 1917 when the Articles of War included "assault with the intent to commit sodomy" as a capital crime. In 1942, the Armed Forces instructed military psychiatrists that "Those who 'habitually or occasionally engaged in homosexual or other perverse sexual practices' are 'unsuitable for military service'." Between 1941 and 1945 nearly ten thousand homosexuals received dishonorable discharges from military service. Since 1945 over 100,000 gay and lesbians have been dishonably discharged.

In 1957 a Navy report, callen the Crittendon Report for the man who headed the committee, concluded that there was "no sound reason for the charge that homosexuals in the military pose a security risk". However, the Pentagon ignored the report for 20 years. During the 60's, gays and lesbians staged demonstrations challenging their treatment by the military. The Vietnam War era saw draft resistors feigning homosexuality to avoid being drafted.

During the Carter administration, gay discharges increased dramatically. In 1981, during the last week of Carter's administration, Deputy Secretary of Defense, Graham Claytor issued a policy stating that "homosexuality is incompatible with military service...The presence of such members adversely affects the ability of the armed forces to maintain discipline;...to facilitate assignment and worldwide deployment of service members who frequently must live and work in close conditions affording minimal privacy; to recruit and retain members of the armed forces; to maintain the public acceptability of military service; and to prevent breaches of security". This policy was implemented by the Reagan administration. 2.

"Don't ask, don't tell"

When Bill Clinton took office as President, he sought to overturn the 1981 ban. However, Congress strongly opposed. In September of 1993 the vote to continue the ban against gays in the military passed in the Senate by votes of 63 to 33, and in the House by 301 to 135. Clinton was forced to accept "Don't ask, don't tell" as a compromise. This represented a continuation of the ban on gays and lesbians serving in the military, with two stipulations. Subordinates and recruits could not be questioned about their sexual orientation by commanding officers, and gays and lesbians serving should not come out of the closet. 3.

Arguing Against

Those who argue against the normalization of homosexuality in the military contend that:
* discrimination based on sexual orientation cannot be equated to race because sexual orientation outlines changeable and chosen behaviors rather than innate characteristics;
* the presence of gays in the close environment of the military in foxholes, showers, and sleeping quarters invades the privacy rights of heterosexuals;
* the military is not the appropriate place for a 'social experiment';
* straight service members would fear sexual harassment and sexual overtures by openly gay and lesbian service members;
* AIDS will increase with the presence of gay service members and blood transfusions in combat will be made risky; and
* sexual behaviors between gays and lesbians would undermine morale. 4.

Arguing in Support

Gay activists argued against these concerns contending that several scientific studies indicate that there may be a biological link to sexual orientation, and that gay and lesbian inclusion is not a social experiment, as they already work and live with heterosexuals throughout society. Gays and lesbians also serve in the military and discrimination against them is wrong. Gay advocates argue that military regulations already prohibit individual sexual activities and open displays of affection while on duty, and that penalties for inappropriate sexual behaviors are already in effect.5.

The Military in the new Millennium

In 2007, retired Army General, John M. Shalikashvili, spoke out for reconsideration of the ban against openly gay men and women in the military. In noting that President Bush had called for a long-term plan to increase the size of the armed forces, Shalikashvili suggested that the time had come to give the policy serious reconsideration. He noted that in a Zogby poll, three quarters of 500 service members returning from Afghanistan and Iraq said "they were comfortable interacting with gay people." He commented, "Our military has been stretched thin by our deployments in the Middle East, and we must welcome the service of any American who is willing and able to do the job." 6.

In October of 2009, President Barack Obama spoke at the annual national dinner of the Human Rights Campaign, the US's largest gay rights advocacy group, reaffirming his commitment to end the ban against gays openly serving in the military. Obama had run a campaign strongly supportive of gay rights in society, however gay activists were frustrated at his failure to take up gay rights issues. Obama assured them of his continued support, saying, "My expectation is that when you look back on these years, you will see a time in which we put a stop to discrimination against gays and lesbians, whether in the office or on the battlefield." 7.

By 2009 the military had expelled 12,500 gay service members since 1993 as a result of violations of the "don't ask, don't tell" policy. With two wars in progress this was a hard-to-abide consequence. A 2009 Gallup poll based on telephone interviews with 1,015 adults found that 69% of Americans were in favor of allowing openly gay men and lesbians to serve in the military. 8.

BACKLASH to Gays in the Military

The military population is more conservative than the broader population. A Military Times poll of active-duty service members in 2009 showed that 58% opposed any change in the policy toward gays, and 23% might not re-enlist if the "don't ask, don't tell" law is revised.
Decisions to enlist are made around the dinner table. Opponents to such a change contended that allowing gays to serve openly could harm unit cohesion and discourage conservative parents from supporting and encouraging their children to enter a 'gay military'. 9

In response to President Obama's request to repeal the "don't ask, don't tell" law Senator Carl Levin called a meeting to discuss the issue. Wendy Wright, President of Concerned Women For America, sent an urgent request to members to "Call your Senators and Representatives and tell them to keep the current law that prohibits homosexuals from openly serving in the military. If the policy is overturned, it would distract from the critical mission of the military simply to impose a sexual agenda onto society." She contended that, "This is not the time to begin social experimentation in our military. Our armed forces are stretched fighting the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq. Repealing the 1993 law now will create an undue hardship on our military and their families." 10.

Admiral Mike Mullen, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff and highest-ranking officer in the armed forces, likes to talk to the enlisted troops and listen to their concerns. In Feb. of 2010, Mullen called for a repeal of the ban as the "right thing to do". Mullen is faced with the possibility of having to ask troops to openly welcome gay men and women. If this becomes a reality, he will be required to act as a mediator between President Obama and the wider cultural scene, advising Obama on what the military and their troops can or cannot accept. 11.

REFERENCES:
1.Urban Institute. "Gay and Lesbian Demographics." 2009. http://www.urban.org/toolkit/issues/gayresearchfocus.cfm. 1/25/10.
2. The Gay Almanac. Compiled by the National Museum & Archive of Lesbian and Gay History. New York: Berkley Books. 1996.:298-311.
3. Ibid.
4. Ibid.
5. Ibid.
6. Shalikashvili, John M. "Second Thoughts on Gays in the Military." NYTimes.com. January 2,2007. http://www.nytimes.com/2007/01/02/opinion/02shalikashvili.html.
7. McGreal. Chris "Obama renews vow to end ban on gay people openly serving in the military." http://www.guardian.com/uk/world/2009/oct/11/obama-gay-rights-in-the-military. 1/29/10.
8. Ephron, Dan. "Don't Ask Too Fast." Newsweek. Jan 12, 2009. http://www.newsweek.com/id/177723/output/print. 1/29/10.
Jones, Jeffrey M. "Majority of Americans Continue to Oppose Gay Marriage." May 27, 2009. http://www.gallup.com/poll/118378/majority-americans-continue-oppose-gay-marriage. 1/29/10
9. Jones, Ibid.
10. Wright, Wendy. "Support Out Troops-Oppose Weakening Our Military." Concerned Women for America. Feb. 1. 2010.
11.Ephron, Dan. Ibid.

(8) Gays in the Corporations: The Gay Battle for Social Reorganization of America

2010-03-10T12:07:00.000-08:00

In the 1970's and 80's, with the encouragement of the women's movement, universities focused on career development over family formation, even for women. Women were being told to be independent, prepare for a profession or go into business so they could take charge of their own lives.

Corporations and businesses recognized that singles without family ties were able to dedicate time and energy to their jobs and were free to travel around the country. The Advocate,which had covered the gay market since 1967, featured a 'how to' guide for the gay traveler in the 1990's. Noting that an estimated $17 billion annually was spent by gay men and lesbians in business related travel, they published a list of travel companies that were 'exceptional' or 'gay friendly'. Included were American, Northwest, Continental and Lufthsa Airlines; Avis, National and Alamo Car Rentals; and Hyatt Hotels. 1.

Out of the Corporate Closet

While some gay men and lesbians were fortunate to be in business for themselves or to work in gay organizations, those working in the business world often found it difficult, having to avoid conversations about their private lives when others talked about their families. Having to hide in the closet during working hours sapped energy and creativity. Kirk Synder, author of Lavender Road to Success: The Career Guide for the Gay Community, contended that "an open work environment leads to happier employees and therefore higher productivity." He found that workers who hide their sexuality at work make less money and are less productive than openly gay people." 2.

Corporate Non-discrimination Policies

Employee associations and unions developed in corporate America to lobby for gay employee's rights and domestic partner benefits. In the 1980's corporations began to include sexual orientation in their nondiscrimination policies. 3.
By 1995, more than 60 American companies had lesbian, gay and bisexual employee groups; half of the Fortune 1000 companies had nondiscrimination policies that included sexual orientation; and over 45% of lesbian and gay men had been promoted at work. 4.

'Best' and 'Worst' companies

Cracking the Corporate Closet is a gay and lesbian guidebook that publishes "the 'best' and 'worst' companies to work for, buy from, and invest in". They use three criteria to make assessments on how 'gay friendly' a company in:
1. sexual orientation included in the company's anti-discrimination policy,
2. domestic partnership benefits offered to its employees, and
3. 'corporate behavior' determined through press reports and interviews conducted with present and former employees.

Their research showed that the key factor in effecting change within a corporation was found to be an active and vocal gay and lesbian employeee group within the corporation. These pressure groups began as informal social networks and then announced their existence publicly, soliciting members and advocating for improved work environments. 5.

In 1995, Cracking the Corporate Closet's list of 'best' companies for gay and lesbian employees included: Apple Computer, Ben & Jerry's, Boston Globe, Charles Schwab, Fannie Mae, Levi Strauss & Co., Lotus, Pacific Gas and Electric and Quark. Quark was founded and developed by Tim Gill, who formed the Gill Foundation and invested millions of dollars to seed gay-rights organizations in all 50 states and provide financial support for gay political campaigns.
Companies that did not include sexual orientation in their non-discrimination policies in 1995 included Hilton, Corning, Home Depot, Marriott, Motorola, Burger King, The Gap and Pepsico. 6.

Pepsico and McDonald's Support the Gay Agenda

By September of 2008, Pepsico had reversed its position on gay rights by donating $500,000 to Parents, Families and Friends of Lesbians and Gays (PFLAG).
PFLAG actively supports the legalization of same-sex marriage and worked to defeat Proposition 8, the ballot initiative which restored traditional marriage in California. The homosexual website, Advocate.com , said that the Pepsico gift was earmarked to help straight allies to "transform people's attitudes and perceptions of gay individuals and the gay community...and effect real and lasting change" in society. Pepsico also gave $500,000 to the Human Rights Campaign, the nation's largest homosexual activist organization and was a prominent supporter of the 35th Annual Lesbian and Gay Pride Parade in New York City with it's own corporate float. 7.

The family friendly fast food chain, McDonald's, also took a public stand to support the homosexual agenda. In early 2008, Richard Ellis, McDonald's vice president of communications, accepted a seat on the board of directors of the National Gay and Lesian Chamber of Commerce. In September of 2008, McDonald's helped to sponsor the annual Out and Equal Workplace Summit which trains employees on how to aggressively promote homosexuality within the company. The 2007 Out and Equal conference had included an organized march into Congressional offices demanding the legalization of same-sex marriage.8.

BACKLASH BY OPPOSING INTERESTS

The American Family Association (AFA) responded with boycotts when Pepsico and McDonald's became publicly and actively involved in pro-gay policies. When corporate decisions at McDonald's promoted the gay agenda, AFA Chairman Don Wildmon said, "This boycott isn't about hiring homosexuals, or homosexuals eating at McDonald's, or how homosexual employees are treated. It is about McDonald's, as a corporation, refusing to remain neutral in the culture war. The company has chosen not to remain neutral but to give the full weight of its corporation to promoting the homosexual agenda, including homosexual marriage." Wildmon urged AFA supporters to "sign, print and distribute a 'Boycott McDonald's' petition at www.boycottmcdonalds.com; and to call the local McDonald's to politely tell the manager they are boycotting the chain until it stops promoting the gay agenda." Wildmon said "The homosexual movement is controversial, and we're simply asking that McDonald's remain neutral." 9.
In October of 2008 AFA announced that the boycott of McDonald's had ended because McDonald's had told them they would remain neutral in the culture war regarding homosexual marriage.

When AFA asked PepsiCo to remain neutral in the culture war, the company refused - choosing to support the homosexual activists and making no effort to hide their support. In the fall of 2008, AFA called for a boycott of all PepsiCo's products, including Pepsi, Gatorade, Mountain Dew, Frito Lay Chips, and Quaker Oats. On it's website, www.boycottpepsico.com, AFA listed the following reasons for calling a boycott. PepsiCo: made large donations to PFLAG and the Human Rights Campaign; requires employees to attend diversity training where they are taught to accept homosexuality; sponsored the TV show Family Guy which pushes the homosexual agenda and denigrates Jesus; supports homosexual publications which feature page after page of nude and semi-nude men in suggestive positions; sponsors 'gay pride' parades across America; and refuses to help those trapped in this destructive lifestyle. In early 2010 the boycott against PepsiCo continued. 10.

REFERENCES
1.The Gay Almanac.Compiled by the National Museum & Archieve of Lesbian and Gay History. NY: Philip Lief Group, Inc.1996:15,156.
2. Johansson, Catrine. "Respect for gays found productive." The Atlanta Journal-Constitution . Sunday, June 27, 2004:1R.
3. Ibid.
4. The Gay Almanac. 1996:101,153.
5. Ibid: 157-159.
6. Ibid:
7. American Family Association Journal. "AFA calls for boycott of McDonald's" Vol.32, No. 8. August 2008:3.
8. American Family Association Journal. "McDonald's sponsors summit promoting the gay agenda." Vol. 32, No. 10. Oct. 2008:3.
9. Ibid.
10. American Family Association Journal. "AFA, 2009, launches boycott of PepsiCo." Vol. 33, No. 1, Jan. 2009:3
AFA boycott. "Reasons for the boycott". http://www.boycottpepsico.com. 2/8/2010.

(7) Gay Demographics: The Gay Battle for Social Reorganization of America

2010-03-07T13:48:00.000-08:00

Mainstream surveys and polls generally neglected to include a separate category for gay people. In 1989 Overlooked Opinions, Inc., a market research and opinion polling firm concerned with the gay, lesbian and bisexual market, was formed in Chicago. A survey done in 1992 with a sample size of 7,500 gay men and lesbians reported on education, income, occupation, and living conditions.

This survey documented that: 1.
* Over 50% had a college degree, with 25% a graduate degree.
* 70% of the occupations were found in the categories of management, health care, education, marketing, technical, clerical, financial, literary, law or science.
* The median income for lesbians was $36,000 and for gay men, over $42,000.
* 45% were home owners, and over 45% lived in the city, with an additional 33% suburban dwellers.
* 71% of lesbians were in a relationship, 52% lived with a partner and 10% of lesbian households included children under 18.
* 55% of gay men were in a relationship, 37% lived with a partner and 4.8% of gay households included children under 18.
* Other facts revealed that in 1991 lesbians and gay men took more than 162 million trips, 78% of which were for business.
* 89% ate out on a regular basis.
* 6 million home computers were purchased between 1988 and 1991.
* Gay men and lesbians were estimated to spend as much as $500 billion annually in the United States.

Gays are not randomly distributed throughout the country. The 2000 Census reported that more than one-quarter of same-sex households were located in five urban areas: New York City, Los Angeles, San Francisco, Washington D.C., and Chicago. This same Census reported that the highest concentration of same-sex households were in 7 urban areas: San Francisco, CA; Santa Fe, NM; Portland, ME; Burlington, VT; Seattle, WA: Miami, FL; and Austin, TX. 2.

THE LUCRATIVE GAY MARKET

Marketing to the gay community developed into a lucrative endeavor. Gay guesthouses and nightlife resorts and cruises became popular. A study by Witech-Combs Communications reported that more than 2.6 million households in the U.S. included children. The International Gay and Lesbian Travel Association defined the growing ranks of gay families as 'a niche within a niche'. In the summer of 2004, Kelli O'Donnell, mother of four, married partner of Rosie O'Donnell, and co-owner of R Family Vacations chartered a cruise dedicated to the gay family market. Rosie was to host a variety hour for the 1,600 gays, children and family members on board. 3.

The Gay and lesbian community in the U.S. is estimated by national surveys to exceed 18 million people with a large majority having disposable incomes above the national average. Households with dual incomes without children have significant buying power. MYgayweb.com(2010) reported that "The Gay and lesbian community is three times more likely to be online than many average Americans" and that "Over 29% of gay internet surfers have yearly household incomes of at least $90,000" with 62% making over $40,000 a year. Many are highly educated, with 73% of gay internet surfers having a college degree, 19% with a Master's Degree or higher. 4.

Businesses recognized that singles without family ties were free to travel around the country. The Advocate, which had covered the gay market since 1967, featured a 'how to' guide for the gay traveler in the 1990's. Noting that an estimated $17 billion annually is spent by gay men and lesbians in business related travel, they published a list of travel companies that were 'exceptional' or 'gay friendly'. Included were American, Northwest, Continental and Lufthsa Airlines; Avis, National and Alamo Car Rentals; and Hyatt Hotels. 5.

REFERENCES
1. The Gay Almanac. Compiled by the National Museum & Archive of Lesbian and Gay History. New York: Berkley Books. 1996:100-102,153.
2.Sears, Alan & Craig Osten. The Homosexual Agenda: Exposing the Principal Threat to Religious Freedom Today.(Revised and updated) Nashville, TN:B&H Pub. 2003:25.
3. Bly, Laura. "A Gay New Time: Family Cruises, Vacations." USA Today. Friday, July 9, 2004:D1.
4. MYgayweb. "Gay Demographics". http://www.mygayweb.com/info/advertising/demographiscs. 1/25/2010.
5. The Gay Almanac. 1996:15,156.

(6) Gays Confront the Media: The Gay Battle for Social Reorganization of America

2010-03-01T07:24:00.000-08:00

When the Comstock Act was passed in 1873, the dissemination of any "article of an immoral nature" through the U.S. mail or across state lines became legally prohibited. It remains on the books today forbidding the use of the mails to distribute obscene material. 1.

In the 1950's, the Mattachine Society, the Daughters of Bilitis, and ONE,Inc. developed into national organizations supporting gay liberation by defying the Comstock laws. In 1958, One Magazine, the first gay magazine to reach a wide audience, won a decision from the U.S.Supreme Court to allow it's mailings. Feminist publications addressed lesbian concerns in the 1970's and 1980's, and during the 1980's and 1990's, gay and lesbian publications boldly promoted safer sex practices, countering mainstream admonitions for celibacy. 2.

When homosexuals were discussed in the news prior to the 1960's it was generally in a negative light. In 1964, Life published an article "Homosexuality in America." Although mostly negative, it attempted to explain homosexuality to the mainstream society.

Following the declassification of homosexuality as a mental disorder in 1973, media became more positive in its willingness to discuss issues related to gays and lesbians. In 1979, Time magazine reported "Homosexual publishing is booming, and gays now receive far more sympathetic coverage in the media...At the same time, there is strong reaction against the homosexual rights movement." 3.

SIX POINT STRATEGY

In 1987 homosexual activists, Marshall Kirk and Hunter Madsen, published an article titled "The Overhauling of Straight America", followed in 1989 by a book titled After the Ball. In these writings Kirk and Madsen laid out a six-point strategy to radically change the way Americans perceived homosexual behavior. 4.
1. Talk about gays and gayness as loudly and often as possible. "almost all behaviors begin to look normal if you are exposed to enough of it at close quarters and among your acquaintances."
2. Portray gays as victims, not aggressive challengers.Tragedies were turned into opportunities to promote the homosexual agenda by portraying anyone who opposed it as a murderer or sympathetic to murder.
3. Give homosexual protectors a 'just cause'. "A media campaign that casts gays as society's victims and encourages straights to be their protectors must make it easier for those who respond to assert and explain their perspectives."
4.Make gays look good. Portray homosexuals sympathetically in the media.
5. Make the victimizers look bad. "We intend to make the anti-gays look so nasty that average Americans will want to dis-associate themselves from such types."
6. Solicit funds.Get corporate America and major foundations to financially support the homosexual cause.

Kirk and Madsen knew that they would be required to wage a war of propaganda. Opponents were portrayed and denounced as ugly caricatures. Even thoughtful and heartfelt concerns for family well-being were vilified as hate-mongering, bigotry or homophobia.

In 1989, The San Francisco Examiner ran a report entitled "Gay in America" that ran for 16 days. Subsequently, newspapers across the country ran articles, often 2 or 3 pages in length, explaining gay issues to the local public. 5.

TARGETING TELEVISION 6.

Three years after the Stonewall Riots representation on prime time TV became a critical symbolic target. Homosexual activists sought to influence the way they were portrayed. They had an important advantage. They had 'agents in place'. A substantial number of gay people, some in high positions, worked in the TV industry who were not open about their lifestyle. These 'agents' were able to leak information to activists about upcoming episodes in which gays were depicted negatively.

Ron Gold, the media director of the Gay Activist Alliance, wrote to all three networks requesting meetings. Before the meeting with ABC, an agent had supplied information about an upcoming episode of Marcus Welby, MD where Welby advised a homosexual who was both a husband and a father to suppress his homosexual desires. The meeting with ABC was confrontational and hostile. A meeting with 25 angry activists was not the kind of meeting that network executives preferred to have. Although the objectionable episode aired a few days later, the meeting did impact later decisions. Gay activists were invited by ABC executives to comment on any scripts dealing with homosexuality.

CHILD MOLESTATION EPISODE 7.

A story line that was unacceptable to gays was an episode that linked homosexuality to child molestation, a relationship that activists wanted to eliminate in the media. When Ron Gold lost his temper with ABC executives, communications broke down. When the Gay Activist Alliance experienced disagreements, Gold split from the group to form the National Gay Task Force(NGTF), which developed as a gay rights umbrella organization around the country.

NGTF turned the episode related to child molestation to a gay media activist in Boston, Loretta Lotman, who launched a national campaign against the Welby show, galvanizing the gay community. Grassroots groups applied pressure on local ABC affiliates. Threats were included as strategies for success. When Lotman called the Boston ABC affiliate, WCVB, she warned that "if something were not done about the program, the station would be 'hit with a protest the likes of which you've never seen before'". Advertisers were pressured to withdraw support.

NGTF pressured the American Psychiatric Association to publicly condemn the offensive Welby episode. They also succeeded in having the National Education Association release a report objecting to the show's portrayal of homosexuals as sterotypes.

In response to this aggressive campaign, ABC issued a statement defending the episode. However, the producers made changes to minmize offenses.

COAST TO COAST SURVEILLANCE 8.

NGTF leaders presented themselves as a 'resource' for information about homosexuality rather than a pressure group. However the possibility of a protest was never out of the question. Between 1974 and 1977, seven 'zaps' - as the activists called their protests - occurred. Gays working in TV continued their surveillance of the industry. The NGTF agenda for network programming included: "increased visibility, elimination of stereotypes, continuing gay and lesbian characters, and gay couples. Gays also insisted on a 'moratorium on negative portrayals'...Gays thus became an ongoing political presence in network television." 8.

The Gay Media Task Force, run by Dr. Newton Deiter, was formed in Los Angeles at the encouragement of NGTF to hold the media accountable on both sides of the country. In the 70's, more and more gay characters appeared on prime-time TV. One critic labeled 1976 as "the year of the gay" because gay characters appeared in "at least seven situation comedies and in several television movies." These shows were aimed at public education. "In virtually every one the heterosexual characters learn to accept gay people and their lifestyles."

MOVING TOWARD THE NEW MILLENIUM

Beginning in the mid 1990's, Ellen, Friends, The Drew Carey Show, Will and Grace, and Sex and the City introduced characters with implied or actural gay behaviors and issues. In the new millenium, Oprah Winfrey embraced gay and lesbian concerns on her popular daily show. Lesbians who had left their husbands to marry their lovers were interviewed, gay men were guests invited to share their life stories, and a week was devoted to the life changes of trans-gendered people. At one point Oprah turned to the television audience and said, "I think this is soooo interesting. Don't you think this is interesting?" Soon Ellen Degeneres, a popular lesbian, became host to a late afternoon talk show. Gay activists had become institutionalized in network TV.

REFERENCES
1. Rierson, Sandra. "Comstock Act(1873). http://www.enotes.com/major-acts-congrsss/comstock-act. 2/1/2010.
2.The Gay Almanac. Compiled by the National Museum & Archive of Lesbian and Gay History. New York: Berkley Books. 1996:281.
3. Leo,
4. Sears, Alan & Craig Osten. The Homosexual Agenda: Exposing the Principal Threat to Religious Freedom Today. Nashville, TN:B&H Publishing. 2003:17-28.
5. The Gay Almanac: 286-287.
6. Montgomery, Kathryn C. Target:Prime Time -Advocacy Groups and the Struggle Over Entertainment Television. New York: Oxford University Press. 1989:Chap. 5.
7. Ibid.:81-83
8. Ibid:87-94.

(5) Safe Sex Becomes Seductive: The Gay Battle for Social Reorganization of America

2010-02-19T08:33:00.000-08:00

SAFE SEX?
In the last 30 years condoms have been claimed to provide safe sex or safer sex. Condoms are being sold and distributed around the world as the solution to casual sexual behaviors in preventing pregnancies and sexually transmitted diseases. They are being 'pushed'by school and university health clinics, and even medical facilities with the implicatin that sex will be safe if you 'protect' yourself with a condom. However, the typical use failure rate of condoms is 14%, accounting for inconsistent and incorrect use as well as breakage and slippage. Use factors such as experience, condom size and use of lubricant can affect slippage and breakage. 1.

A study involving 26,291 homosexual men and heterosexual man and women who visited the University of Colorado's clinic in Denver over a two year period reported that 57% of the women, 48% of the heterosexual men and 33% of the homosexual men reported error in condom use.2.

Efficacy rates for condom use is generally reported for pregnancy. However, rates for sexually transmitted diseases vary by disease. Condoms do not prevent transmission of the human papillomavirus which is the leading cause of cervical cancer. Michigan's statewide gay newspaper, Between The Lines , reports that the risk of anal cancer increases by nearly 4,000% for men who have sex with men. They state that a condom only offers limited protection against anal cancer.3.

Suppose, for example, that 20 million people used condoms for 'protection' and safe sex. By the typical use rate of 14% failure, two million and eight hundred thousand people will be unpleasantly surprised that they were, in fact, not safe.

STD's IN THE GAY POPULATION

The Center for Disease Control (CDC)reports statistics on sexually transmitted diseases (STD's) in the United States and its dependent areas. Health departments report their data to CDC so the information can be analyzed to determine who is being affected and why. The CDC 2008 surveillance report estimates that there are approximately 19 million new STD infections each year - almost half of them among young people 15-24 years of age.

Syphilis makes a comeback

Syphilis was a disease that was on the verge of elimination. In 2001 it re-emerged as a public health threat because of a resurgence of the disease among men who have sex with men (MSM). In 2008 there were 13,500 reported cases of primary and secondary syphilis, the most infectious stages of the disease. Reported cases of syphilis showed that 63% were among MSM. This is of particular concern because syphilis infection facilitates HIV transmission. Syphilis rates among blacks were about eight times higher than that of whites in 2008.4.

HIV/AIDS enters the country

HIV was introduced into the U.S. through the homosexual community. After its initial diagnosis in 1981, it spread rapidly across the country through male homosexuality, intravenous drug use, bisexuality, and multiple heterosexual partners. Infants were infected by mothers who had the HIV virus. In 2006, CDC estimated that over half (53%) of new cases occurred in gay and bisexual men.

Through 2007, the cumulative estimated number of AIDS diagnoses in the 50 states and the District of Columbia(DC) was well over one million - 1,018,428. Over half of these cases(50.3%)was reported in four states: New York, California, Florida and Texas. By 2007, the cumulative estimated number of deaths from AIDS in the 50 states and DC included 557,902 adults and adolescents and 4,891 children under 13 years of age. Although Blacks represented about 12% of the U.S. population, cumulated estimated AIDS cases for Black and African Americans through 2007 exceeded that of Whites, numbering 426,003 to 404,465 respectively. Black women were particularly affected as bisexual men brought the disease home to their wives and girlfriends. 5.

# of AIDS cases for 50 states and DC through 2007 = 1,018,428
# of AIDS deaths for 50 states and DC through 2007 = 562,793

Life expectancy for gay and bisexual men is compromised by perhaps 20 years.
An article printed in the New York Times reported that a young male homosexual has about a 50% chance of getting HIV by middle age. In 1998 the CDC reported that an estimated half of all new infections of HIV in the U.S. were among people under 25.6.

Other STD's common among the homosexual population.

Included in this list of particular concern is anal cancer. Other maladies include Chlamydia, cryptosporidium, herpes simplex virus, human papilloma virus or genital warts, isospora belli, microsporidia, gonorrhea, viral hepatitis types B&C and syphilis. 7.

PROMOTING RESPONSIBLE POLICIES

Joseph Nicolosi, President of NARTH said, "Most medical groups have embraced the homosexual agenda and are advocating that lifestyle despite all the scientific studies and medical evidence that demonstrate medical and psychological risks...Homosexual activism and political correctness are clearly trumping science." 8.

It is essential in any society that policies are implemented that promote and protect the health and well-being of its citizens. The American Public Health Association and other health organizations must be aggressively held accountable for accurate reporting. 'Activist spin' must not be allowed to override responsible scientific research.

Evidence shows that mortality and morbidity rates are substantially higher for those who engage in homosexual practices, particularly anal intercourse, with the tearing of the rectal lining and diseases associated with subsequent contact with fecal matter. "Activism must not be placed above science in informing public policy. It is an injustice to homosexual men and women to allow activism, including accusations of homophobia, to silence discussion of health risks or to suppress research." 9.

REFERENCES
1.Workshop Summary:Scientific Evidence on Condom Effectiveness for Sexually Transmitted Disease Prevention. 2000, June 12-13. Hyatt Dulles Airport. Herndon, VA. National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases. Nat. Institute of Health, Dept. of Health and Human Services. July 20, 2001:10. http://www.3.nlaid.nih.gov/about/organization/dmid/pof/condomreport.pdf.
2.Condomman, "Condom Use and the Spread of Sexually Transmitted Diseases." http://www.condomman.com/articles/index.php?tag=rising-std-rates. April 19, 2008.
3. Glenn, Gary. "Compassionate Society Should Discourage Homosexual Behavior." American Family Association. htp://www.freepublic.com/focus/f-news/1039280/posts. March 19, 2001.
4.CDC. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. "Sexually Transmitted Diseases Surveillance, 2008". http://www.cdc.gov/std/stats08/trends.htm. 1/10/2010.
5.CDC. "Basic Statistics, 2007". http://www,cdc.gov/hiv/topics/surveillance/print/basic.htm. 1/10/2010.
6. Brinkman,Susan. "Health risks of the homosexual lifestyle." Catholic Standard & Times (May-June, 2004). http://www.catholiceducation.org/articles/printarticle.html?id=4236. 1/10/2010.
7. Ibid
8. Ibid.
9. Byrd, A. Dean."The American Journal of Public Health Highlights Risks of Homosexual Practices." NARTH. http://www.narth.com/docs/risks.html. 1/10/2010.

( 4)Politics of GRID - HIV/AIDS: The Gay Battle for Social Reorganization of America

2010-02-13T11:31:00.000-08:00

It was 1981. Dr. Jeffrey Satinover braced himself as he examined a gaunt young man whose arms and sides were covered with angry purple welts from a rare, ugly cancer, Kaposi's Sarcoma. This once rare disease was now popping up around the country, especially in San Francisco and New York. This deadly, wasting disease was known then simply as GRID, "gay-related immune disorder" because of its disproportionate appearance among male homosexuals. As GRID spread it was grouped with other conditions such as "gay-related bowel syndrome" which gays were prone to because of the practice of anal intercourse.

It was anticipated that the fledgling gay movement would be dealt a severe setback for medical reasons. Unexpectedly the gay community's first priority was "to protect homosexuality itself as a perfectly acceptable, normal, and safe way of life". Because the virus could be transferred to anyone, the first move was to rename "gay-related immune disorder" to AIDS: "Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndrome", though gay related anal intercouse and promiscuity created and continues to preserve the American reservoir for HIV/AIDS. Thus, AIDS was politicized from the start. 1

Social and cultural factors came together to bring about a delay in the attack on AIDS. Because the disease was linked to homosexuality and drug use, many people in positions of power felt the problem did not need to be seriously addressed. Some religious leaders declared that AIDS was punishment for the sins of homosexuality. Also the Reagan administration's policy of smaller government and austerity in social and health programs created competition for government funds and AIDS researchers lost out in the battle. 2.

AIDS was causing 53,000 deaths a year in North America by 1995. By 1997 an expensive AIDS cocktail including protease inhibitors was being used that reduced the amount of the HIV virus in a patient's bloodstream providing additional years of relatively healthy life. The death rate dropped from 59 per 100 people with AIDS to 4per 100 in 1998. No vaccines had proven successful. The Centers for Disease Control researchers were concerned that unsafe sex among young gay men would increase if they believed that AIDS could be effectively controlled by protease inhibitors. 3.

June 2003 edition of the Journal of the American Public Health

The above issue discussed risks associated with homosexual practices. Bad news was reported in one article after another: 4.

- Among 4,295 homosexual men who reported engaging in anal sex with one or more partners in the previous year, 48% reported unprotected receptive anal sex and 55% reported unprotected insertive anal sex. Unprotected anal sex was highly associated with drug and alcohol use. (Beryl A. Koblan et.al)

- Sex without disclosure of HIV status is common. Data from a study indicated that 45,300 gay or bisexual men, 8,000 heterosexual men and 7,500 women who were HIV infected engaged in sex without disclosure of theri HIV status.(Daniel H. Ciccarone, et. al.)

- A study of six metropolitan areas reported 93% of African American men who were HIV infected did not know they had the virus, contradicting the view that 'coming out' is associated with better mental health, responsible behavior and lower rates of HIV infection. African-American men who disclosed their homosexuality had a higher HIV prevalence (24%) and engaged in more unprotected anal sex (41%) than those who did not disclose their status. (14% and 32% respectively).(David J. Malebranche)

Homosexuality and mental illness were discussed in the Archives of General Psychiatry. J Michael Bailey concluded, "Homosexual people are at a substantially higher risk for some forms of emotional problems, including suicidality, major depression and anxiety disorder." This conclusion was corroborated by a study from the Netherlands published in Archives of Psychiatry, 2001. The Dutch society is one of the most gay tolerant in the world. Yet the risk for mental illness by those engaging in homosexuality is significantly higher than among heterosexuals in that country.5.

In response to the above research, Dr. A. Dean Byrd, Vice President of The National Association for Research and Therapy of Homosexuality, expressed concern that the authors failed to conclude that "homosexuality is neither innate nor immutable," that "homosexual men and women have a choice in how they respond to their attractions," and "that homosexuality represents an adaptation - not an identity." Byrd criticized many of the authors for being preoccupied with 'homophobia' without allowing room for other hypotheses. Byrd stated, "Perhaps it is not homophobia but misquided activism that is responsible for the current health problems that plague homosexual individuals...Rights issues seem to have replaced individual and community health concerns." 6.

REFERENCES1. Satinover, Jeffrey. Homosexuality and the Politics of Truth. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Books. 1996:9-16.
2. Sullivan, Thomas J. Introduction to Social Problems. Boston:Allyn and Bacon Pub. 2000:116.
3.Palen, J. John. Social Problems for the Twenty-first Century.
4. Byrd, A. Dean. "The American Journal of Public Health Highlights Risks of Homosexual Practices." NARTH. http://www.narth.com/docs/risks.html. 1/10/2010.
5. Ibid.
6. Ibid.

(3) Focus on The Professional Health Organizations: The Gay Battle for Social Reorganization of America:

2010-02-09T17:17:00.000-08:00

In 1963, concern about the increase in homosexuality prompted the New York Academy of Medicine to address the subject of homosexuality. Noting that some homosexuals were arguing that sexual deviancy is a 'desirable, noble, preferable way of life', they issued the following statement: "Homosexuality is indeed an illness. The homosexual is an emotionally disturbed individual who has not acquired the normal capacity to develop satisfying heterosexual relations." 1.

Until 1994, when all references to 'sexual orientation related disorders' was removed from the official policies of the American Medical Association, this perspective was used to justify therapies for treating homosexuality. 2.

The American Psychiatric Association also viewed homosexuality as a mental disorder until 1973. Over the years cures for treating homosexuality included: castration or vasectomy(1890's), hypnosis (1890's to 1960's), lobotomy (early 1900's to 1950's), analysis, hospitalization or institution(1920's to 1970's), aversion therapy, including drug caused nausea or electroshock (to the 1970's), and abstinence (1890's to the present).3.

Demands for normalizing homosexual behaviors occurred in the early 1970's. A homosexual faction in the American Psychiatric Association(APA) planned to disrupt the annual meetings of the APA, challenging a paper presentation on homosexuality and transsexualism. The following year the APA agreed to sponsor a special panel led by homosexuals. The Gay Liberation Front planned a demonstration at the meetings. On May 3, 1971, gay activists broke into a meeting, grabbed a microphone, and declared, "Psychiatry has waged a relentless war of extermination against us. You may take this as a declaration of war against you."

"In 1973 the APA voted to strike homosexuality from the officially approved list of psychiatric illnesses." Only about one-third of the membership was involved in this decision. A follow-up survey reported that "69 percent of psychiatrists disagreed with the vote and still considered homosexuality a disorder." The American Psychological Association voted to follow the lead set by the APA. 4.

Psychiatrist Jeffrey Satinover lamented that although psychiatry is presumably a scientific discipline and makes its decisions based on scientific evidence, the changes in definition and classification were determined not by scientific evidence, but were corrupted by politics. 5.

Political pressure again affected decisions of the APA when in 1994 the chairman of the APA's Committee on the Abuse and Misuse of Psychiatry presented to the Board of Trustee's a change, making it a "violation of professional conduct for a psychiatrist to help a homosexual patient become heterosexual even at the patient's request." When the board sent the statement to its legislative body, a fierce battle ensured.

Therapists who help homosexuals change and ex-homosexuals threatened to file a lawsuit against the APA and reopen consideration of the 1973 decision, which removed homosexuality from the list of mental illnesses. However, the Gay and Lesbian Task Force continued to challenge not only psychiatrists who undertook reparative therapy, but also to challenge psychologists, social workers, pastoral counselors, and ministers. The National Association of Social Workers (NASW), which accredits mental health practitioners, was also lobbied by gay activists to declare the use of reparative therapies a violation of the NASW Code of Ethics.6.

BACKLASH ON 'REPARATIVE THERAPY'

NARTH

The APA met challenges to its assertion that counselors should refrain from helping homosexuals change their sexual orientation. In the mid 1990's professionals concerned about the APA retreat from therapy formed the National Association for Research and Treatment of Homosexuality (NARTH) to serve as an alternative to APA and a referral service for homosexual clients. By 2000 the membership was over 1000. NARTH is a "professional, scientific organization that offers hope to those who struggle with unwanted homosexuality." It provides educational information, conducts and collects scientific research, and promotes therapeutic treatment to those seeking their help. NARTH contends that "The right to seek therapy to change one's sexual adaptation should be considered self-evident and inalienable." 7.

Dr. Spitzer's testimony

Psychiatrist Robert L. Spitzer had offered key testimony in 1973 stating homosexuality was not a clinical disorder, leading to the APA proposal that declassified homosexuality as mental disorder. Several decades later, however, Spitzer, a professor of Biometric Research at Columbia University and Co-Editor of Psychiatry's Diagnostic and Statistical Manual reversed his position, contending that mental health professionals had abandoned homosexuals who were attempting to change their sexual orientation. After former homosexuals picketed an APA meeting, Dr. Spitzer talked to numerous ex-gays and had a radical change of mind about the possibility of homosexuals changing their orientation. Spitzer conducted a study, interviewing 143 males and 57 females, to determine whether and how people change sexual orientation. Spitzer concluded that the research "Shows some people can change from gay to straight, and we ought to acknowledge that."

Initially many colleagues and members of the gay community felt outraged and betrayed at his change in perspective. Spitzer noted, "I think that has largely dissipated. But also, I'm at the point in my career that I don't worry about such things," He added, "the politically correct term now is reorientation therapy. Reparative already implies something's broken - of course the reparative therapists believe this, but it kind of infuriates the gays to even call it reparative therapy." 8.

Exodus International

Christian leaders stepped forward to protect the rights of homosexuals who sought to change their sexual orientation. In 1973, Frank Worthen ministered to homosexuals in the U.S. He organized a conference of ex-gay ministers who formed a coalition called Exodus International, North America. In 1978 a group formed in Australia, followed by an independent group, Exodus Europe, which formed in the Netherlands in 1982. Leaders from around the world joined in 2004 to form Exodus Global Alliance. "Exodus is a nonprofit, interdenominational Christian organization promoting the message of Freedom from homosexuality through the power of Jesus Christ...Exodus is the largest Christian referral and information network dealing with homosexual issues in the world." Each year over 1000 members and interested persons come together for instruction and celebration in a five-day event in cities throughout North America. 9.

Love Won Out Conference

Love Won Out Conferences are organized by Focus on the Family to minister to those who struggle with unwanted same-sex attractions and to family and friends of those who are living homosexually. Since 1998, Love Won Out has traveled to more than 50 American cities to bring "the power of God's love and His desire to transform the life of a struggling homosexual to find freedom in Jesus Christ." Attendance is limited to adults, although participants ages 16-18 may attend if accompanied by a parent. Speakers include ex gays and lesbians,Christian counselors, ministers, and educators. Melissa Fryrear, an ex-lesbian and director of gender issues for Focus on the Family notes that many protestors often have attended the conferences carrying signs accusing Love Won Out with intolerance and bigotry. She says, "There is nothing intolerant about what we say,". An 18 year-old gay attendee commented, "While I strongly disagree with many points in your message, you presented them in a loving way. I think it's important that people look at all sides of this issue...This conference was informing." 10.

REFERENCES
1. Satinover, Jeffrey. Homosexuality and the Politics of Truth.Grand Rapids, MI:Baker Books. 1996:32.
2. The Gay Almanac.Compiled by the National Museum & Archive of Lesbian and Gay History. New York:Berkley Books. 1996:221.
3. Ibid.
4. Satinover:32-35.
5. Ibid:37.
6. Ibid: 35-36.
7. NARTH. http://www.narth.com/index.html. 1/24/2010.
8. Adamson, Victor J. "Homosexual change study supports reparative therapy."
Report from the American Association of Christian Counselors. June 13, 2001.
http://www.victorjadamson.com/articles2/article.php?id=4. 1/23/10.
Leblanc, Douglas. "Therapeutically Incorrect: Atheist psychiatrist argues that gays can change." Christianity Today. April 2005, Vol.49, No. 4:94.
Spitzer, Robert L. http://borngay.procon.org/viewsource.asp?ID=003506.1/24/10.
9. Exodus. "Who We Are". http://www.exodusinternational.org/about_exodus.shtml. 1/25/2010.
Exodus History. http://www,exodusglobalalliance.org/ourhistoryc87.php. 1/25/2010
10. Fryrear, Melissa. "Love Won Out is about ministry, not intolerance." Focus on the Family. Feb. 19, 2009.
Focus on the Family. Love Won Out Conference advertising brochure. 2004.

(2) Focus on Education: The Gay Battle for Social Reorganization of America

2010-02-03T16:18:00.000-08:00

In 1974 the National Education Association added 'sexual orientation' to its resolution on nondiscriminatory personnel policies. Diversity training, which includes acceptance of the gay and lesbian lifestyles, became the requirement for educational administrators, teachers and students.

CLAGS

In the 1980's gay and lesbian studies developed in universities across the country. The Center for Lesbian and Gay Studies (CLAGS), was established by the Graduate School of the City University of New York in 1991 with a grant from the Paul Rapoport Foundation, a major supporter of gay/lesbian concerns. CLAGS operated as a clearinghouse for scholarly research, conferences and public programs on gay related issues. It also prepared syllabi and curriculum supporting gay and lesbian studies for all grade levels.

GLSEN

Seventy gay and lesbian educators formed the Gay and Lesbian Independent School Network (GLSTN) in 1990 to form Gay-Straight Alliances (GSA's) with the policy of protecting lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) students. Chapters were established across the country. Kevin Jennings, one of the founders, was hired as it's first full time staff person. In 1997, GLSTN changed it's name to Gay, Lesbian and Straight Education Network (GLSEN). GLSEN has registered more than 4,000 GSA's on school campuses and grew to 40 full time staff. GLSEN sponsors the National Day of Silence at schools across the country to bring attention to the silence caused by anti-LGBT bullying.

The Rainbow Curriculum

The gay agenda sought to promote tolerance and understanding of the gay/lesbian lifestyles in the public schools and to normalize these lifestyles in the public perception. In the early 1990's, elementary curriculum entitled Children of the Rainbow encouraged diversity and inclusion of non-European, women and gay and lesbian history in every stage of education from kindergarten through high school. Books supporting gay and lesbian families and the gay lifestyles were included in school curriculum.

It's Elementary -

In 1999, a ninety-minute video, entitled It's Elementary: Talking About Gay and Lesbian Issues in School was shown on public broadcasting stations across the country. The video showed elementary grade-level classroom discussions about homosexuality. Young homosexuals informed the students of the five gender orientations: male, female, gay, lesbian, and bisexual.

BACKLASH

When the video, Elementary: Talking About Gay and Lesbian Issues in School aired across the country, groups opposing the use of the schools to promote homosexuality staged protests. In San Antonio, Texas, 200 protestors picketed Public Broadcasting station KLRN to protest the showing.

The normalization of homosexuality became 'politically correct' in academic and educational settings. Silence was no longer imposed upon those supporting gay rights, rather those seeking to challenge the gay lifestyle were violently attacked and intimidated.

Diversity training

Diversity training sometimes became sessions of intimidation. At the University of Delaware, student Countney Halligan was not opposed to attending the required training. She soon changed her mind. In one-on-one sessions students were encouraged to speak openly about their sexuality and gay students felt pressured to publicly out themselves. The program was suspended in response to student complaints and pressure from the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education , a Philadelphia based civil liberties advocacy group. The school's vice president for student life said, "The university had good intentions...but the way the program was run was unacceptable."

Educational Materials Promote Homosexuality

When same-sex marriage became legal in Massachusetts in 2003, pro-homosexual picture books were placed in the classrooms in the name of tolerance and diversity. Robin Wirthlin was puzzled when her 2nd grade son came home and reported to her about a story at school of a prince who didn't like the princesses his mother brought home. He fell in love with a prince and married him. Wirthlin was concerned that books like this were read to grade-schoolers. She questioned the teacher who said it was the school district's mandate to read pro-gay lifestyle books to her students. Another couple, David and Tonia Parker, were also concerned when their kindergarten son brought home a "Diversity Book Bag" which included a picture book called Who's in a Family? . The text began "Laura and Kyle live with their two moms,... Robin's family is made up of her dad,Clifford, her dad's partner...".

When the Wirthlins and the Parkers filed suit against the town of Lexinton asking to exempt their children from teaching about homosexuality, The U.S. District Chief Judge Mark Wolf ruled against parental rights stating, "The (state)Constitution does not ...permeit the Parkers and the Wirthlins to exempt their children from teaching about homosexuality or same-sex marriage." He wrote, "After all, if a few parents could do it, others would follow, maybe in vast numbers."

Intimidation

In 1993, David Woodward, a political science professor at Clemson University, was asked to serve as an expert witness for the state of Colorado to testify about the political power of homosexual groups in America. When he testified in support of traditional values he discovered that to publicly oppose gay rights was "the equivalent to being sent to the university Gulag". He was labeled 'ideologically incompatible' with the values of the university, the press attacked him viciously, and he often found the word 'Homophobe' scribbled on his office door. In his book, Why We Whisper:Restoring Our Right to Say it's Wrong, Woodward and coauthor, Jim DeMint, point out, "freedom of speech is crucial in any democracy...The demise of good government comes when this conversation is abbreviated."

Concerned Groups Speak Out

Concerned Christians and groups supporting traditional family values worked tirelessly to challenge and oppose the gay takeover of educational institutions.

The Tradional Values Coalition networks with 43,000 churches to provide materials for pro-family lobbying activities. The director, Rev. Louis P. Sheldon writes, "Children have long been targets of homosexual activists...GLSEN has established Gay Straight Alliance clubs in hundreds of junior and senior high schools. The goal of GLSEN is to convince sexually confused children that they were 'born gay'...The Day of Silence is supposed to give students a chance to protest alleged discrimination against homosexual, bi-sexual, and transgender students...In reality, the effort is designed to intimidate and silence any opposition to the homosexual agenda..."

Concerned Women for American (CWA) holds community and state events and informs the public of issues affecting the family. In 2007 a notice was sent to parents and grandparents of school-aged children stating. "The term 'Radical Homosexual Agenda' refers to a movement begun approximately 25 years ago to 'normalize' homosexuality and other deviant behaviors within our culture...Their rally cry is 'Whoever controls the schools controls the future.' High on their agenda is to expose children to sex at earlier and earlier ages in our schools..."

When President Barack Obama nominated Kevin Jennings, the founder of GLSEN, to be Assistant Deputy Secretary of Education, in charge of the Office of Safe and Drug Free Schools, CWA founder, Beverly LaHaye wrote, "Jennings and GLSEN have one goal: promote homosexuality and transexuality to children through schools - away from the protection of parents, churches, doctors and others who know homosexual acts are unsafe, immoral and damaging..."

Dr James Dobson, founder of Focus on the Family, also expressed deep concern about the appointment of Kevin Jennings as the head of the Office of Safe and Drug Free Schools. Dobson states, "What hypocrisy!...He has written five books advocating homosexual teaching in the schools and elsewhere, as well as the foreward to a widely publicized book titled Queering Elementary Education."

The battle over control of education will continue as groups supporting and opposing the normalization of gay and lesbian lifestyles seek to influence the teaching of the next generation.

REFERENCES

Buss, Dale. "Homosexual rights go to school." Christianity Today. Vol. 37, No. 6(May 17) 1993:70-72.

Colson, Charles. "The Whisper Zone:Why We're Losing Our Right to Speak Out." Breakpoint. Prison Fellowship Ministries. May 1, 2008.

Curtis, Barbara. "in the beginning." Citizen. Vol.22, No.3. March, 2008:24-27. Focus on the Family. Colorado Springs, CO.

Dobson, James. Dr Dobson's Newsletter. Focus on the Family, Colorado Springs, CO. Nov.2009:3.

Dorsett, Amy. "Protest in S.A. targets KLRM." San Antonio Express News. July 3, 1999:1B.

Elder, Gene. "Gay/lesbian studies:outof the closet, into college." San Antonio Express News/ Nov.3, 1991:4M

GLSEN. "Our Mission. Our History". http://www.glsen./org/chi-bin/iowa/all/about/history/index.html. 1/21/2010.

LaHaye, Beverly. Concerned Women for America newsletter. Fall, 2009.

Sheldon, Reverend Louis P. It's Not Really About Marriage: The Radical Homosexual Agenda to Undermine American Culture." Traditional Values Coalition. Washington DC. 2005:14-15.

The Gay Almanac. National Museum & Archive of Lesbian and Gay History. NY:Berkley Books. 1996:180-186.

Watson, Jamal. "When Diversity Training Goes Awry." http://diverseeducation.com/cache/print.php?articleId=10543. 1/22/2010.

The Gay Battle for Social Reorganization of America

2010-01-29T16:45:00.000-08:00

Over the last 50 years gay activist groups have organized to construct a social reorganization of America. Although a comprehensive survey of sexuality conducted in 1992 at the Unversity of Chicago documented that 2.8 percent of men identified themselves as homosexual or bisexual and 1.4 percent of women defined themselves as lesbian or bisexual,(1) the gay culture, influenced by the civil rights and women's movements, rapidly influenced the American culture with gay liberation.

The movement to bring homosexual behavior into social acceptance is challenging every social institution with fundamental change, including the government and legal systems, educational systems, the professional health industry, corporations, religious organizations, and the institution of marriage and family, the media, and the military.

As the gay movements gained momentum, particularly in the media, the schools and churches, powerful counter-movements and organizations developed to challenge the changing expectations of sexual behavior as being personally and socially destructive. Battles ensured as groups within education and health systems, religious organizations and the military claimed adverse impacts on societal outcomes.

The normalization of homosexuality within society will create profound changes in social organization, especially in the areas of social integration, social reproduction, social health and the intergenerational transfer of cultural values. The social discourse has been rampant with charges of bigotry, homophobia and hate mongering. However, neither intimidation, tolerance nor back slapping love fests are appropriate means to bring about change in social behavior that has wide reaching consequences. These foundational social issues deserve serious and thorough consideration.

"The concept of externalities helps define situations that justify government intervention and identify appropriate policy solutions to the problem. Externalities exist when an individual's actions impose costs on or provide benefits to others who are not parties to the decision... This approach provides criteria for when government should act and the type of policies it should use...Positive externalities provide gains for society, while negative externalities produce losses..." (2)

In 2003, Melik Kaylan called for caution in discussing the growing changes in society. "Libertarians, now both on the left and right, say that relations between consenting adults should not be regulated if no participant is hurt, which includes the freedom to marry anyone you please. Here, there's no concern for the aggregate effect on society of cumulative individual choices...Gay marriage...alarms many Americans precisely because it contends blurry unknowable enormities. We will be, after all, the first society ever to pursue the experiment fully... What will be the ultimate human cost, and who will have the courage then to identify the cause?"(3)

REFERENCES

1.Laumann, Edward O., John H. Gagnon, Robert T. Michael, and Stuart Michaels. The Social Organization of Sexuality: Sexual Practices in the United States. University of Chicago Press, Chicago, IL,1994.
2. Steinacker, Annette. "Externalities, Prospect Theory, and Social Construction: When Will Government Act, What Will Government Do?" Social Science Quarterly,Vol.87, No 3. September 2006:459-476.
3. Kaylan, Melik. "The Way We Live Now." The Wall Street Juornal. Fri. Aug. 8, 2003: Opinion Page.

Keys To Loving Family Relationships

2010-01-10T16:06:00.000-08:00

Loving relationships within the family lay a foundation for personal health and wellness. Families are a special way that love and healing are made manifest. The family is the unique organization in which we become whole in our relationships. This wholeness requires that we grow in the graces of faithfulness, patience, forgiveness and self-control. From these graces flow the joy and peace of connectedness and loving assurance.

Our modern culture emphasizes self-interest, but it is within the family that we accept others into our definition of self. Families are under stress today because social pressures that once held families together are weakened. We want our family to be a place of joy and happiness. It is up to us to make it happen.

We'll focus on four keys that will help to unlock loving relationships in our families:
* Positive communication;
* Conflict resolution;
* Money management;
* and Attitudes of gratefulness.

POSITIVE COMMUNICATION

Families provide for us a sense of companionship and completeness. Communication is essential for the expression of these relationships. When communication breaks down, love is blocked. Resentment and hostility replace companionship. Communication takes time. We need to clear our schedules of activities that keep us from communicating with each other.

In many families the key to communication cannot be found. The doors to meaningful discussions are locked. Communication involves talking, listening and understanding. Unfortunately we often are more inclined to talk about our own wants than to listen to the concerns of others. All people have an immense need to be truly listened to. Communication also requires that you share yourself verbally and non verbally in such a way that the other person can understand and accept what you are sharing.

Thoughts to Ponder
1. Communication is to love what blood is to the body. When communication breaks down, love is blocked.
2. Words have power. Choose them carefully. Words can hurt, injure, and anger, or they can heal, help and comfort.
3. Research shows that tone of voice, facial expressions and gestures communicate even more effectively than words.
4. Do your words, facial expressions and body language encourage loving family relationship?

CONFLICT RESOLUTION

Conflict is natural when people live together. Our creator has made each of us differently, and family members seek to protect their uniqueness. When we are threatened, we feel an impulse to attack. Conflicts arise out of personal values, beliefs and needs. We truly love the members of our family when we understand and appreciate the ways in which they are unique. Conflict in families is an opportunity to recognize each other's needs and uniqueness and to celebrate differences. Conflicts are to be resolved, not avoided. Conflict resolution requires working together, listening, and caring. Make your family a place of safety through resolving conflict in a healthy way.

Ground rules for conflict
1. Realize that conflict is natural. People who live together will experience conflict.
2. Don't try to win. Make it a win-win solution where everyone feels OK.
3. Find a way to de-escalate. Look for the positive. Hurtful comments increase defensiveness.
4. Keep the big picture in mind. Don't let molehills become mountains.

MONEY MANAGEMENT

Money problems often cause anger and conflict in families. Money problems rank among the top four reasons leading to divorce. The problems increase as the number of people in the family increases. Problems develop when decisions about money create distance and resentment. Family members should feel that their needs and values are supported by the way in which family finances are spent.

The value of a family member should never be equated with the person's net worth. Family relationships can be destroyed if a love of things becomes a higher priority than a love of each other. Freedom from money problems more often results from spending less than earning more.

Questions to ponder
1. Is your money being spent to support your priorities?
2. Are behavior problems leading to money problems?
3. What holes need to be plugged where money disappears without knowing where it went?
4. Have you considered the feelings of other family members in regard to how the family money is spent?

ATTITUDES OF GRATEFULNESS

Appreciating the people who live in our family is foundational to loving relationshilps. The dynamic that keeps a family happy is a positive attitude. We are trained in our culture to focus on the problems that need to be solved. We too often develop a negative attitude and resent the people in our family who aren't living up to our expectations. When we cling too tightly to expectations, we lose a sense of appreciation for the goodness in those around us. Often the best way to eliminate negative behaviors is to accentuate the positive ones.

Growing in gratitude
1. To create joy in your relationships, focus on what is admirable about the people in your family.
2. When family members do something good, say so! "Thank you" and "I like that" are powerful tools for good relationships.
3. Negative impasses will break down when a positive attitude replaces anger.
4. You can choose what to pay attention to. Focus on what is wonderful about the other person.

Loving relationships don't just happen. They are the result of a decision and commitment to grow in understanding amidst all the problems and concerns that family life presents throughout the years. You can turn the keys to loving family relationships.

REFERENCES:
* Poduska, Bernard E. For Love and Money: A Guide to Finances & Relationships.Pacific Grove, CA: Brooks/Cole Pub. 1993.
* Ryan, M.J. Attitudes of Gratitude in Love: Creating More Joy in Your Relationship. NY: MJF Books. 2002.
* Whiteman, Thomas A., Ph.D. and Thomas G. Bartlett, Ph.D. The Marriage Mender: A Couple's Guide for Staying Together. Colorado Springs, CO:NAVPress.1996

Health Care Reform Begins at Home

2009-07-02T11:37:00.000-07:00

Each of us makes decisions about our own physical and psychological health and wellness. Much of our personal illness and injury is created by lifestyle choices related to destructive habits in eating, exercise, cleanliness, drinking, smoking, drug use, and reckless driving.

President Obama, in his discussion on health care reform policies, emphasized preventive health care, urging all of us to take more responsibility for our own health.

Chruches are also adding health and wellness dimensions to their ministry, a practice that is consistent with the concerns of Jesus for healing and wholeness.

Restoring the health of our family relationships and sexual behaviors should be a priority concern in our move toward health care reform. Both religious and secular education needs to include rigorous preparation for healthy sexual, marriage and family relationships, beginning with children and increasing for teens and older.

"The devastating impact of marital and family breakdown on individuals and on our society as a whole has been well documented, yet too often we stand by helplessly while families fall apart. We often fail to provide the relationship education and support needed to build strong families whose members enjoy each other and cope effectively with life's challenges...
We can learn the skills to build healthy relationships;
we can unravel the emotional tangles that sabotage our families;
we can build on family strengths to establish the deep friendship and mutual commitment that undergirds lasting marriages and healthy families." 1.

Many organizations and resources provide help in the development of family relationship growth. (marriagelovepower.net)

Classes on marriage enrichment and parenting skills should be offered on a continuing basis, with classes focusing on premarital counseling, different stages of marriage, and childhood development.

HEALTHY SEXUALITY

Modern social influences are bombarding us with enticement into dangerous and destructive sexual behaviors that too often result in debilitating disease, broken trust, broken relationships, and broken lives.

Healthy sexuality focuses on ultimate concern for the individual lives involved and ultimate concern for the lives of children who develop from sexual togetherness.

PORNOGRAPHY DISTORTS HEALTHY SEXUALITY

Speaking out against the dangers of pornography and educating people, especially young people, about lustful addictions and sexual distortions that grow from pornographic images is an essential and valuable concern for health and wellness.

PREMARITAL ABSTINENCE AND FAITHFUL MONOGAMY WITHIN MARRIAGE

Our contemporary society is presenting sex as a toy for personal pleasure, even to the young. Tragic consequences related to sexually transmitted diseases, loss of self esteem, broken trust, children born out-of-wedlock, and abortion become the reality for too many people. Young people need to be given the understanding and commitment to resist the temptations of careless sexuality.

An understanding of the importance of sexual abstinence before marriage and faithful monogamy after marriage is a foundation for healthy sexual behaviors.

THE DANGERS OF 'SAFE SEX'

The careless double talk of 'safe sex' and the handing out of condoms, even to middle school students, puts sexual health in jeopardy. Condoms are not safe. They have a 14% actual use failure rate, a failure rate of 1 out of 6 or 7 time. This amounts to Russian roulette sex. The common use of the phrase 'safe sex' in regard to condom use is cruel, dangerous and careless.

THE SANCTITY OF LIFE IS THREATENED

Healthy living is a call to respect the value of each life, and a call to order our lives in ways that we support and cherish our own life and the lives of others.

Since 1973, abortion has taken the lives of over 50 million infants. About 80%
of abortions are performed on unmarried women, as young women are told that a fetus is 'merely a mass of tissue' rather than a developing child.

The development of the ultrasound machine is allowing women to respect and watch the growth of their child. Pregnancy centers are protecting and educating women in the development of their child.

Women who feel that they are unable to raise a child can be supported in their pregnancy and encouraged to offer their children to loving couples seeking a child to adopt.

PROTECTING TRADITIONAL FAMILY RELATIONSHIPS

Heterosexual marriage is primarily a social issue. It becomes a religious concern and a political concern because it is a foundation for social integration, freedom, reproduction and health.

The normalization of homosexuality in society would create profound changes in social organization that warrant caution and serious consideration rather than the heated arguments that are being generated.

Social Integration -
The traditional family is the building block for the integration of society as members grow in understanding of various perspectives within the family. In spite of immense variation within the sexes, there remain fundamental differences in biological and psychological make up. Heterosexual marriage seeks to integrate these elements into a caring unit.
As men relate intimately to men and women to women, social disintegration will occur.

Social Freedom -
The family preserves and passes down its unique cultural values to the next generation, providing checks and balances in society which guard against destructive extremism. Homosexuality will jeopardize the intergenerational transfer of cultural patterns within society.

Social Reproduction -
Homosexuality will jeopardize social reproduction and the intergenerational transfer of genetic patterns. Reproduction will necessitate contrivance and manipulation, buying and selling.

Social Health -
Personal health risks associated with homosexual behavior are deeply troubling. According to the American Medical Association, homosexual youth are 23 times more apt to contact a sexually transmitted disease than their heterosexual counterparts. In the U.S., men who have sex with men account for 60-70% of estimated HIV infections, although they represent only 5-7% of the population.

CAUTION IS WISDOM -

Countless research studies confirm that the greatest sources of nurture, support and meaning for the majority of Americans are found within the family unit. Legal constraints maintain a sense of appropriateness. Extending the range of permissible behavior will put in jeopardy social integration, freedom, social reproduction, and social health.

HEALTH AND WELLNESS BEGINS WITH US AND OUR PERSONAL CHOICES.

1.United Methodist Marriage Ministries (Overview). www.marriagelovepower.net.

Obama, Socialism, and the Threatened Family

2009-06-17T11:28:00.000-07:00

Words express our joys, they also express our fears and observed concerns.

Pastor Jeremiah Wright, when asked whether he had spoken to his former church member, President Obama, since moving into the White House, replied, "Them Jews ain't going to let him talk to me."

Ironically, the white supremacist, James von Brunn, who killed a security guard at the Holocaust Museum in Washington DC made almost an identical statement, "Obama was created by Jews. Obama does what his Jew owners tell him to do."

San Antonio Express News Columnist, Jonathan Gurwitz, dismisses these concerns,finding it "almost too much to comprehend" that "nutjobs on the left and right have the same unhinged preoccupation with all things Zionist."(June 17,2009,
pg. 7B)

However, from my experience and observation it is very possible that President Obama's move toward socialism has been guided and influenced by Jewish professionals.

In 1976 I completed my master's thesis in the School of Industrial and Labor Relations at Cornell University. A large portion of the professors, perhaps even 40%, were Jewish and socialism was accepted by most professionals as the direction in which our country was heading.

During this same time period, Dr. Urie Bronfenbrenner, a Jewish professor in the School of Human Ecology at Cornell, had returned from doing research in China. Bronfenbrenner was impressed by the child care patterns he observed in China, and concluded that this was the direction in which we need to move. He made a number of public speeches to this regard.

* * *

I wrote a letter to the local newspaper, the Ithaca Journal. The letter was printed verbatim as a guest opinion column on Tuesday, December 7, 1976.

The remaining portion of this entry will be a reprint of this article.

The Ithaca Journal titled the article:
THE NUCLEAR FAMILY: IS IT THREATENED BY SCIENCE?
by Marjorie Coppock

I am increasingly upset by the continued proliferation of Professor Urie Bronfenbrenner's interpretation of the American family. His basic concerns for family, caring relationships and concerned societies are certainly areas with which I identify; however, his conclusions and solutions indicate a bias in data collection that I have come to believe is not only misleading but deliberately so.

In a front page article in the Land Grant Gazette, Dr. Bronfenbrenner deplores the existence of problems such as "family disintegration, high divorce rates, children growing up in families with a single working parent, plunging achievement scores in basic communicaton skills among high school students, drug abuse, delinquency, high rates of child abuse." He contends that the American family is dis-integrating, becoming increasingly disconnected from the rest of society.

He states: "We've carried our individualism, the 'do your own thing' mania to ends that are not constructive. We have a paranoia about helping one another, excusing it with axioms about how you'll wreck the moral fiber of people by giving them a helping hand. This may be true when you are strong and know how to help yourself, but it's not so fine for the sick, the elderly, those who are small and alone, for children who can only be victims. We are not a caring society. We are unwilling to make irrational loving commitments to children, to families, grandparents, relatives, even our wives and husbands. And beyond to friends, neighbors, community, indeed even to our country."

He continues in the article to commend the socialist countries such as Sweden and China for their exemplary patterns of 'people caring'. His lecture on this topic follows the same pattern - Our families and communities have fallen apart: therefore, we need to adopt socialism because socialism 'serves the people'.

Dr. Bronfenbrenner decries the loss of the extended family: the grandparent, aunt-uncle, brother-sister support system which in the past has cared for the individual. He decries the breakup of the nuclear family; the high divorce rate and the large number of working mothers. He decries the mania of 'do your own thing'. However several situations have converged to cause me to believe that his concerns are more political than compassionate. (Although I am not questioning the depths of his compassion.)

Last summer, I was discussing Dr. Bronfenbrenner's concerns with a woman who now lives in Rochester. She commented, "I'm interested in what you're saying because I was a student in that department 20 years ago. The situations that he claims have now occurred are the very things we were taught to teach. We were to encourage students not to return to their home town and to their extended families but rather to move to a new town in order to be independent and 'do your own thing'. Perhaps he has helped to create the situation that he is now exploiting."

The second situation concerns the brand of feminism that is supported by the professional educators. If the extended family has been threatened in the past by professional counsel, the nuclear family is presently under intense attack by those women whom the professionals choose to support.

As a student at Cornell I actively tried to bring to consciousness the important contributions made to our society by homemakers believing that these contributions should be recognized by more than the Ladies Home Journal. Much to my dismay I discovered that many professional women also are unappreciative of these contributions. Women are being encouraged to remain single or accept divorce as a viable alternative. Women are being encouraged to leave their families and to leave their children in day care centers, to develop careers and enter paying jobs.

One woman professor stated, "We should not just stay at home and have children who only cry and vomit." Another woman in a lecture advised the men in the audience to "kick your wives out of the house. Make them become economically independent so they will not be a burden upon you."

I am not necessarily opposed to all of these trends; however, my concern is deepened by the realization that one of the main advisors for the women's studies program is a male professor who works closely with Dr. Bronfenbrenner. The question becomes, "Are these men working against each other or with each other?"

The third situation which causes me to question the statements of Dr. Bronfenbrenner is the treatment accorded by the professional community to data recently collected for my Master's thesis in another department at Cornell. These data contradict almost all of the statements he makes. The thesis was a survey of the woman volunteer. A 10 page questionnaire was mailed to 900 women volunteers in Tompkins County. Five hundred and thirteen women thoughtfully completed and returned these questionnaires.

The predominate impression from this overwhelming response was that of a deep concern for family, community, the sick, the elderly and the children. These women were not motivated by a mania to 'do their own thing' but rather a desire to 'serve the people' because of a love for their fellow man. They expressed no paranoia of helping one another. Their responses and comments (written along the edges, between questions and on the backs of the pages) indicate irrational loving commitments to family, neighbor and community.

Their deep concerns were perhaps developed by the altruistic and intrinsic rewards instilled by religion as 85 percent of the women identified with a religious affiliation. These 513 women gave 3,205 hours each week to community service organizations. Because the sample was randomly drawn these data can legitimately be extended to thousands of women. In observing the volunteers in our community I suspect the data could be equaled by the men who contribute generously of their time to run church activities, service organizations, scouts and sports activities.

* * *

I was not prepared for the treatment which I received from the professional community. Although data had been collected on background characteristics, volunteer job involvements, attitudes toward job satisfaction and attitudes toward six currently debated policy orientations it was dismissed as 'predictable and merely data'. After receiving the returned questionnaires I received essentially no more help from the professors in the analysis of the data.

The only assistance was the following advice: "Tell the women they are being exploited, they are taking paying jobs from other women, they should form a union so the National Labor Board can speak for them and then go on strike." I was stunned. Although the data does not support this advice it was repeated on two other occasions.

I cannot condone or condemn socialism. I would need more information to do so. Perhaps we could benefit by adopting some of the 'people caring' patterns of socialist countries. I do, however, deplore the manipulation, distortion and suppression of data for political reasons. I have both personal experience and observation to support the contention that this is occurring. We cannot deliver a caring society from the bowels of deception.

When Dr. Bronfenbrenner speaks with concern for the American family and in the same breath praises the Chinese and Swedish families he overlooks the government infringment and control which exists in socialist countries over the cultural training of the children. The beauty, freedom and strength of America and of existence itself lies in a multiplicity of ideas and in variations of cultural interpretations. The authority and autonomy of the family unit is the cornerstone upon which these variations are built.

A Mother's Day Tribute

2009-05-05T19:08:00.000-07:00

This Sunday in America we'll pause in our hectic pace to remember our mothers and the importance of their love and guidance in shaping our lives.

It is with a grateful heart that I remember my mother, Elizabeth Hare, who passed on to her reward 10 years ago.

Although Mom was primarily a wife and a mother, she was a strong, wise and independent woman long before woman's lib became popular in the '70's.
She had been trained as a Baptist missionary, but after marriage her family and her local church became her mission field. She worked several years as the Director of Religious Education for our church and also several years as a social worker.

When we four children left home, Mom invited us back with our families every two years to gather for a reunion. We have rich memories from these gatherings.

Both Mom and Dad took time to write their observations and feelings about the importance of life and the beauty in their lives. They would have enjoyed blogging.

Last Father's Day (June 11, 2008) I shared some of Dad's insightful and humorous observations about nature on my blogsite.

This blog will pass on some of Mom's poetic reflections in which she shares her joy and love for living.

TIC-TAC-TOE

God opened up this day for me,
And said, Now make it good.
Explore your world and work with love
As every Christian should.
Let not the routine patterns,
Thwart pictures in the mind.
Play tic-tac-toe with problems.
Joy wins the game you'll find.

AT THE ORGAN

I never will be famous
For musical array,
But in my heart a melody
I sing and write today.

I talk to my Creator,
I play Him songs most dear,
I know that He will listen,
Without a critic's ear.

I pour my soul's vibrations
Into the ivory keys,
Not man, but God will hear them,
'Tis Him I seek to please.

The world is rushing madly
Trying to find life's way
While joy and peace engulf me,
As holy tunes I play.

I LIKE POPCORN

Each person has a weakness,
We must admit with shame,
I too confess I'm guilty
In this lack-of-will power game.

At evening when we're resting
Perhaps with friends who've come,
I argue that the children,
Would like some food for fun.

Popcorn - that will please them,
If they don't play too rough,
I'll pop a great big bowlful
But I won't touch the stuff.

The children call out to me,
Hurry up, we can't resist.
Their nostrils smell corn popping,
From play they all desist.

I tell myself, now this time,
Your will must not give way,
But when the bowl is empty,
I've eaten more than they.

Some day I know I'll conquer,
My figure will grow slim,
But as long as there is popcorn,
I'm afraid I'll never win.

MOTHER, MAKE HIM STOP IT!

Mother, make him stop it.
He's hitting me in the back.
Why must I have a brother
That I always want to smack?

Can you tell me why he trips me,
Every time that I must pass?
Make him go outside, Mom,
Weed the garden, mow the grass.

And so it goes - these children,
They bicker, fuss and fume.
They like it. I don't mind it.
I suppose it chases gloom.

THE CRICKET IS SINGING A SONG TO ME

The cricket is singing a song to me,
Ta-ree, ta-ree, ta-ree.
In the darkness of night when all is at rest,
I think he must be free.

Free from the worry of human noise,
Free to explore alone,
To walk around in the silent earth,
And then to mount his throne -
To sing the song that's inside of him,
And tell me to have no fear,
'Mid rush and work and family tasks,
There is always time to cheer.

Says he at night when all is asleep,
Relax and my song I'll sing.
It will quiet your mind and clear your thought,
As my message, ta-ree, I bring.

Yes, the cricket is singing a song to me,
Ta-ree, ta-ree, ta-ree.
In the darkness of night when all is at rest,
And the hour from care is free.

NIGHT

Listen, my soul,
To the silence of peace,
Enveloping night
In its lazy release.

Dream on, weary mind,
Of lofty new aims,
To fire the morn
At dawn's glowing change.

Arise, heart anew,
And gird thyself well,
Awake to new light,
Love's passion to tell.

Guard zealously yet
The hours of the day.
Fill each open moment
With laughter, still pray -
That the evening approaching
From labor is meant -
To offer reward
For each second well spent.

Listen, my soul,
To the silence of peace,
Enveloping night
In its lazy release.

Mom lived to be 89. She passed on a rich heritage of love to her children and grandchildren. Thank you, Mom.

A Year of Concerns

2009-03-27T18:17:00.000-07:00

Concerning This, began on March 28th, 2008. Incentive for it's formation came from the Center for Disease Control after it announced the STD rate of teenage girls in the United States. Deeply concerned about many destructive patterns developing in our country, I began to share my thoughts, in hope that conditions may improve. Readers are invited to make comments. I thank the precious few who have taken time to share their thoughts.

This blog entry will list the discussions from March 28th of last year to the present, with a capsule summary of the concerns discussed.

TRAGIC STATISTICS! WAKE UP AND SMELL THE COFFEE!- March 28, 2008
One in four teen girls has at least one sexually transmitted disease. More than 45 million abortions have been performed in the U.S. since 1973, 81% to unmarried women. By 2005, 35% of babies born in the U.S. were born out of wedlock and 40% of children are being raised without a father in the home.

WHAT NEXT? PROCREATION OR PRODUCTION? - April 1, 2008
Advances in reproductive technologies challenge our sexual and family relationships, raising many ethical questions.
* How far should commerce and reproduction mix?
* Are the rights of children of the new biology being ignored?
* What is it doing to the way we think about ourselves, each other, and our children?

THE DECEITFUL WEB OF PORNOGRAPHY - April 4, 2008
Pornography and sexual temptation are ripping the soul out of our American culture. We rationalize our destructive behaviors by weaving a web of deception around us: "I can handle it." "I'm not hurting anyone." "It's just entertainment."
Pornography is BIG BUSINESS.

HOMOSEXUALITY? CAUTION IS WISDOM - April 8, 2008
The profound changes that would occur in social organization warrant caution and serious consideration, particularly in regard to social integration, social freedom, social reproduction, and social health.

THE CON IN CONDOM: SAFE SEX! - May 13, 2008
Typical condom use has a failure rate of 14%. Would you get into a car with that probability and feel safe? If 20 million people trusted condoms for safe sex, two million, eight hundred thousand people will be 'unpleasantly surprised'. They are being passed out to junior high students.

THE ENDANGERED BLACK FAMILY AND OUR ENDANGERED CULTURE. - May 27, 2008
In their book, Come On People: From Victims to Victors,Bill Cosby and Alvin Poussaint courageously document a social tragedy that has concerned social scientists for decades. In 1950, 5 out of 6 black children were born into a two-parent home. Now 70% are born outside of marriage.
Black male rappers have churned out a profane style with antisocial, angry, women-hating messages.

A FATHER'S DAY TRIBUTE - June 11, 2008
My Dad would have enjoyed blogging. He liked to write down his observations of nature and share them. Here are a few.
* If you see a bunch of leaves bouncing like they had cricket legs, look carefully and you'll see a fox sparrow in the middle "kicking it up" as fox sparrows do.
* A tree full of blackbirds sounds a lot like water dropping into a hundred buckets.
* Tonight it is raining...a frog...hopped into the kitchen. I picked him up and told Elizabeth if she would kiss him, he might turn into a Prince. But she would not. So we let him out.

THE HIGH COST OF MARRIAGE BREAKDOWN IN AMERICA. - June 17, 2008
Increases in divorce, single-parent families and children born out-of-wedlock are creating expensive personal and social tragedies as commitment to family is replaced by self-orientation. A study released in April of 2008 reported $112 billion annual taxpayer cost due to increased expenditures for anti-poverty, criminal justice and education programs from high rates of divorce and unmarried childbearing.

IT PAYS TO ENRICH YOUR MARRIAGE AND FAMILY! - June 24, 2008
Marriage enrichment, different from marriage counseling or therapy, is an educational learning process of making marriage better, happier, and more satisfying. Marriage enrichment activities develop skills in affirming each other, conflict resolution and caring communication. It is the best investment you can make for yourself, your future, your children, and your family!

HOW'S THE WEATHER INSIDE? A WORKSHOP FOR MARRIAGE ENRICHMENT. - July 11, 2008
Plan a workshop for marriage enrichment. There are many resources available for help. Every marriage has many storms to weather as life progresses and changes. Marriage enrichment activities develop skills in affirming each other, conflict resolution and communication. Conflict is something to be resolved, not avoided. It is an opportunity to recognize each other's needs and uniqueness. Creative communication is a chance to grow closer together.

TEXAS LEADS IN MARRIAGE STRENGTHENING PROGRAMS - July 28, 2008
On June 15th of 2007, the Governor of Texas signed into law 2 bills designed to support the development of healthy marriages and families: House Bill 2683 - Strengthening Families, and House Bill 2685 - Marriage Preparation Courses. By promoting these bills, Texas took the lead at the state level in promoting programs to give families tools to succeed in marriage and family relationship skills.

WHEN ORGANIZATIONS AND FAMILIES COLLIDE August 10, 2008
We are spending an increasing amount of time in organizations, away from our families. Our social education programs are failing to educate citizens in skills necessary for healthy family relationships. In their report, Marriage in America: A Report to the Nation, the Council on Families contend that making marriage stronger will require a shift in cultural values and public policy. They conclude that educational, religious, civic, business, political, and health organizations must all work together to regain the social value of marriage and family.

HOLY HUMANISM! IT'S POLITICALLY CORRECT! September 20, 2008
In 1933, contending that the universe is self-existing and that worship and prayer must be replaced by a sense of personal life and social well being, the Humanist Manifesto outlined the establishment of a new religion based on modern science.
In 1973, a second manifesto announced that ethics must be considered autonomous and situational, and that civil liberties must be extended to the right to die, euthanasia, suicide, birth control, abortion, divorce and the right to engage in varieties of sexual behaviors between consenting adults. These proposals are being taught in our universities and schools as what is now politically correct.

ECONOMIC SOCIALISM ENDANGERS OUR FREEDOMS! October 1, 2008
Our freedoms are at stake in the horrendous request that asks taxpayers to give the government SEVEN HUNDRED BILLION DOLLARS of their hard earned money to bail out fiascos on wall street. Giving government bureaucrats at the treasury department centralized control over the money available for making business loans and more importantly, giving them the authority to decide the eligibility rules as to who will receive these loans moves us into the realm of economic socialism.

IT'S NOT OUR ECONOMY, S____, IT'S OUR CHARACTER! WHAT HAPPENED TO THE DREAM? October 13, 2008
What is needed at this junction in history are leaders who have the WISDOM, WILL, AND COURAGE to help us restore a greater loss than money. Who can lead us back to citizenship and social, personal, and moral responsibility so the foundation of our country can be protected and restored?

BE WARY OF SOCIALISM, VERY WARY! October 24, 2008
Socialism is a vast bureaucracy dictated by the few for the good of the few and the control of the many. In times of crises 'benevolent dictatorship' is often held out as the obvious solution. However, benevolent dictatorship is a contradiction in terms.
It is the faith of the free system of government that open and honest debate provides a foundation where the general population can choose the form of laws and regulations that will best serve the greatest good. The government is then held accountable to the people for its continuing existence.

THE NEW MORALITY THREATENS US ALL. November 30, 2008
In 1884, Freidrich Engels, co-author of the Communist Manifesto, outlined a new social organization. Women would be drawn into industry, men and women would be equal in rights and responsibilities, the means of production would pass into common property, the family would be abolished as the economic unit of society, housekeeping would become a social industry, and all children would be taken care of by the state whether they are born in wedlock or not.
From these changes will spring the new morality that Engels calls Sex Love.
This new society will give rise to more unrestrained sexual intercourse. Sex love replaces committed family love. When affection is "displaced by a new passionate love", separation becomes a blessing.

IMAGINE NO RELIGION. IMPOSSIBLE! December 26,2008
All persons and groups develop meaning systems that guide their decisions and behaviors which they then pursue with religious fervor. It is impossible to 'imagine no religion'.
When the Freedom From Religion Foundation asks us to imagine no religion they are in reality asking us to imagine no God, no higher power to which we are accountable. The attempt to remove the concept of God from our society raises deep and legitimate fears related to individual integrity, freedom and survival.

VAST CONCLUSIONS FROM HALF VAST DATA. January 11, 2009
The process of scientific investigation attempts to overcome personal bias and preference by a reliance on an objective analysis of facts systematically collected. Unfortunately, however, science can be and sometimes is misused for political agendas. The temptation may be to distort the results by using only a portion of the data that supports the agenda or to widely over generalize the results to imply 'all' when only 'some' is appropriate.

MARTIN LUTHER KING, JR'S STRENGTH TO LOVE. January 19, 2009
Dr. King, black ministers and leaders of the civil rights movement were insistent that the demonstrations for freedom would be controlled, orderly, dignified and non-violent. This powerful strength to love, in spite of past and present violence against them was a convincing factor that led to the passage of the civil rights acts of 1964 and 1965.

FREEDOM OF CHOICE DIVIDES THE NATION. February 4, 2009
Because abortion is intimately related to the value and meaning of human life and family, it became one of the most explosive, bitter, and divisive conflicts in America. State and federal laws were passed following Roe v. Wade limiting whether, when and under what circumstances a woman may obtain an abortion. The Freedom of Choice Act, introduced but not passed in 2007, would prohibit federal, state or local governmental entities from interfering with a woman's right to choose abortion. Senator Obama, now President, spoke to Planned Parenthood saying, "The first thing I'd do as president is sign the Freedom of Choice Act".

BIAS AND ERROR IN THE COSTLY DEATH PENALTY SYSTEM. February 14, 2009
There is much bias in the death penalty in America. Where a person commits a murder affects their chances of being put to death. The finality of the death penalty also raises concern about errors in sentencing. A study found that between 1989 and 2003, 340 prisoners convicted of murder and rape had been exonerated. DNA evidence and false witness identification were involved in many exonerations. The death penalty is an expensive cost to the taxpayer compared to a sentence of life without parole.

EUTHANASIA COMES TO THE UNITED STATES. February 24, 2009
On March 5th of 2009, the state of Michigan became the second state to enact into law the Death With Dignity Act. Opponents contend that Assisted Suicide is a more accurate name for the act. Depression is a primary factor linked to assisted suicides, and treatment for depression should be given before suicide is considered. Patients often seek death as a relief from relentless pain. Yet with good medical care, pain is almost always manageable.

SPEAK OUT TO PROTECT FREEDOM OF CONSCIENCE. March 21, 2009
As budget and bailout concerns capture the news and the public attention, the Department of Health and Human Services(HHS) is quietly making plans to throw out the conscience rules that protect medical workers who refuse to perform medical procedures contrary to their moral convictions. President Obama, furthering his support for abortion rights, announced plans to roll back the conscience rules, stoking battles between abortion and right-to-life supporters. HHS is receiving comments from medical personnel and the public through April 9, 2009 in regard to this issue.

Speak Out To Protect Freedom of Conscience!

2009-03-21T17:35:00.000-07:00

As budget and bailout concerns capture the news and the public attention, the Department of Health and Human Services is quietly making plans to throw out the conscience rules that protect medical workers who refuse to perform medical procedures contrary to their moral convictions. 1.

Following Roe v. Wade in 1973, state and federal conscience clauses were enacted to protect health care workers who didn't want to perform abortions. Subsequent protections developed to protect reluctant health care workers from participation in euthansia and assisted suicide.

THE PROVIDER REFUSAL RULE

In August of 2008, the Bush administration proposed legislation that was enacted into law on inauguration day of 2009. The Provider Refusal Rule strengthened protections for doctors, nurses and workers in health care settings who refuse to provide a medical service because of moral convictions.

This legislation also protects healthcare providers from being involved in additional procedures, like sex change operations and assisted suicide, as well as vaccinations and family planning, if they are morally opposed to the procedures.2.
Pharmacists would also be protected from refusing to prescribe medicine, including the morning-after pill, if they opposed the prescription on moral grounds.

This bill does not violate the ability of a person seeking services to receive them from another source, but protects the conscientious medical decisions of professionals who object to particular services.

THE OBAMA ADMINISTRATION PLANS TO RESCIND THE 'CONSCIENCE RULE'.

At the end of February 2009, President Obama, furthering his support for abortion rights, announced plans to roll back the conscience rules, stoking battles between abortion and right-to-life supporters.

Dr. Suzanne T. Poppema, board chair of Physicians for Reproductive Choice and Health, praised Obama "for placing good health care above ideological demands."

However, Toni Perkins, president of the Family Research Council, said "Protecting the right of all health-care professional's judgments based on moral convictions and ethical standards...is necessary to ensure that access to health care is not diminished, which will occur if health-care workers are forced out of their jobs because of their ethical stances. President Obama's intention to change the language of these protections would result in the government becoming the conscience and not the individual." 3.

COMMENTS ARE INVITED AND ENCOURAGED THROUGH APRIL 9, 2009.

Advocates on both sides, medical groups and the public are invited to contact the Department of Health and Human Services to make comments on this proposal through the first week of April to express their opinions about changes in the conscience clauses.

HISTORY OF MEDICAL CONSCIENCE

The Hippocratic Oath, which pertains to the ethical practice of medicine, has traditionally been taken by physicians and continues to be a sacred document among health care professionals.

"I will follow that system of regimen which, according to my ability and judgment, I consider for the benefit of my patients, and abstain from whatever is deleterious and mischievous. I will give no deadly medicine to any one if asked, nor suggest any such counsel; and in like manner I will not give a woman a pessary to produce abortion"... (from the Hippocratic Oath)

Hippocrates was a celebrated Greek physician in the 4th century BCE. Even then physicians were organized into a guild with regulations for training and a professional ideal of practice.

"CHURCH AMENDMENTS"

In the 1970's, conscience provisions contained in the Department of Health and Human Services directives collectively known as the 'Church Amendments' (42 U.S.C.&300a-7) were enacted in response to whether or not the receipt of federal funds required recipients to perform sterilizations or abortions.

Conscience provisions provide that:

* the receipt of government funds does not require that individuals or entities be involved in sterilization or abortion procedures if it would be contrary to religious beliefs or moral convictions.

* Entities receiving funds (grants, contracts, loans), including biomedical research entities, are prohibited from discriminating against any physician or health care personnel who refused to perform a lawful sterilization or abortion procedure based on religious beliefs.

* Entities receiving funds are prohibited from discriminating against any applicant for training or study because of the applicant's reluctance to participate in counseling or assistance in abortions or sterilizations based on the applicant's religious beliefs or moral convictions.

CONCERNS ABOUT GOVERNMENT TAKEOVER OF MEDICINE

When freedom of conscience is overruled by directives from govenment or a governing board, totalitarian regimes may command citizens to engage in atrocious behaviors in opposition to their own feelings of appropriate behavior.

THE NAZIFICATION OF MEDICINE

A tragic example was seen in Nazi Germany, where doctors were used to commit unspeakable horrors under the direction of the state.

Physicians were identified as 'servants of the state'. Personal responsibility for decisions was taken away from individual doctors and nurses. 4.

The overarching Nazi biomedical vision involved medicalized killing, killing in the name of healing for the good of the 'Volk'. Sterilization, mercy killing, euthanasia and destroying 'life unworthy of life' were seen as responsible medical practices.

In a period of 7 years, the Nazi holocaust eradicated an estimated 21 million people, many of whom were killed by medical doctors who had no voice or choice but to obey the directives of the state or lose their license. Those killed included the handicapped, children, aged, sick, ethnic groups, conscientious objectors, and any critics who opposed the Nazi agenda. 5.

MEDICAL KILLING IN AMERICA

Since the enactment of Roe v. Wade in 1973, over 49,500,000 legal abortions have been performed in the United States. Since the legalization of abortion, the pressures not to abort have been replaced by a multitude of social pressures encouraging abortion. Increasingly, accounts of research studies related to abortion and stress report that in many cases the choice to abort was not made by the woman but was forced upon her by husbands, parents, doctors, counselors, or friends. 6.

In 1994, Oregon voters approved a bill permitting terminally ill patients with less than six months to live to request and self-administer lethal doses of medicine. On March 5,2009, Washington State became the second state to approve this initiative, called the Death With Dignity Act.

Opponents of the bill contend that 'assisted suicide' is a more accurate description of this legislation. Kenneth Stevens, a Portland, Oregon radiation oncolgist said assisted suicide "is a reversal of the historic role of physicians as healers, as comforters, as counselors." 7.

FREEDOM OF CONSCIENCE IS DEMOCRACY IN ACTION

The ability to act on personal and moral conscience is the foundation of our liberty and freedom. The right of individuals to speak up and act on the basis of their individual sense of moral rightness provides the checks and balances that protect us from the tyranny of totalitarian dictatorship.

The Obama administration is concerned that the Bush regulations could put in jeopardy family planning services and counseling for vaccines. The administration will review comments from the public before making a final decision.

Responsible citizenship requires that we speak out to make our concerns heard.

REFERENCES
1. Lewey, Noam. N. February 27, 2009."Obama administration may rescind 'conscience rule'.Washington Bureau. Chicagotribune.com.March 21, 2009.
2.Berger, Matthew. March 3, 2009. "Obama Plans to Rescind Healthcare 'Conscience Clause'. http://www.crosswalk.com/news/commentary/11600261. 3/21/2009.
3. Young, Saundra. March, 19, 2009. "White House set to reverse health care conscience clause'". CNN.com. Campbell Brown: No Bias. No Bull.
4.Lifton, Robert Jay. 2000. The Nazi Doctors: Medical Killing and the Psychology of Genocide. Basic Books
5. Rummel, R. J. 1992. Democide: Nazi Genocide and Mass Murder. New Brunswick,NJ: Transaction Pub. http://www.hawaii.edu/powerkills/NAZIS.CHAP1.HTM.
6. Basu, Alaka Malwade(ed.) 2003. The Sociocultural and Political Aspects of Abortion:Global Perspective.Chapter 14.The Social Pressure to Abort. Praeger Pub.
7. Allen, Marshall. August, 2004. "Death Wishes". Christianity Today. Vol.48, No.8,page 24.

Euthanasia Comes to the United States

2009-02-24T20:33:00.000-08:00

In 1994, the debate about end-of-life care changed drastically in the U.S. when Oregon voters approved the Death with Dignity Act. This bill permits terminally ill patients with less than six months to live to request and self-administer lethal doses of medicine. The ruling does not legalize euthanasia on demand. Only the terminally ill are covered. By 2006, 200 people had used this bill to take their own lives. 1.

On March 5th of 2009, the state of Washington will become the second state to enact into law the Death with Dignity Act, called initiative 1-1000. This law, labeled by opponents as the Assisted Suicide bill, was passed by 58% of the voters in Washington.

CONCERN ABOUT ABUSE

The Michigan Law Review analyzed ramifications of Oregon's law. In a legal paper, Dr. Herbert Hendin, psychiatrist and CEO/Medical Director of Suicide Prevention International, and Dr. Kathleen Foley, neurologist and professor at Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, "cited specific examples where opinions of patients' long-time attending physicians are ignored and doctors with only a smattering of familiarity with the patient write the prescription for the lethal dose of barbiturates." 3.

Another study by researchers at the Oregon Health and Science University showed that one-fourth of the people killed in Oregon by this procedure were depressed but received lethal drugs anyway.

DEPRESSION AND PAIN MANAGEMENT 4.

Respect for the dignity of life requires that we remove the reasons that people want to die.

Depression is a primary factor linked to assisted suicides. Depression is a condition that should be diagnosed and treated before suicide is considered. Many doctors, however, are often unable to diagnose the symptoms.

Patients often seek death as a relief from relentless pain. Yet with good medical care pain is almost always manageable. When pain is relieved, patients almost always regain their will to live.

LESSONS FROM HOLLAND'S MOVE TO EUTHANASIA

Before 1990, euthanasia and assisted suicide, although not officially legal, were well recognized as medical practices in the Netherlands.

A report(by van der Maas et. al) in the New England Journal of Medicine stated that for the years of 1990-1995, Dutch deaths that included medical intervention with the intent to end life involved 76% that did not involve an explicit patient request for death. Data for 1995 reported 13,919 deaths with clear patient request and 42,874 deaths with no clear patient request.

A bill was passed in 1999 to change the Criminal Code in order to legalize euthanasia and assisted suicide, thus normalizing actions that were already in practice. 5.

In 1994, Herminia Dykxhoorn accompanied her father to Holland to visit his elderly siblings. She noted in surprise that in 30 years, Holland had moved from:

- assisted suicide
- to euthanasia of people who are terminally ill,
- to euthanasia of people chronically ill,
- to euthanasia for mental illness,
- to euthanasia for psychological distress or mental suffering;

and from voluntary euthanasia to involuntary euthanasia. 6.

BRINGING EUTHANASIA HOME

After visiting the Netherlands, pathologist, Dr. Jack Kevorkian was inspired to offer assisted suicide in the United States. In 1990, Dr. Kevorkian started his campaign claiming, "It's your life, it's your death; it should be your choice."

Kevorkian participated in at least 130 assisted suicides before being sentenced to a 10-25 year term in prison. Kevorkian left prison after serving eight years, promising not to help anyone commit suicide but also vowing to continue working for legalized assisted suicide. 7.

THE SLIPPERY SLOPE OF ASSISTED DEATH

Assisted suicide and euthanasia involves much more than a sense of compassion and relief from pain. It carries great potential for abuse. Voluntary suicide may insidiously become involuntary suicide.

Relatives may pressure elderly, terminally ill or disabled family members to end their lives if long-term care becomes burdensome. States may decree that life support is optional and health-care providers may cap or refuse benefits.

A chilling reason for choosing euthanasia is that it is cheaper than treatment. Insurance companies may conclude that funding assisted suicide is cheaper than funding a cure or supporting the disabled.

Advances in medical technology raise questions about how far we should go in preserving and protecting life. Emotionally charged debates between supporters of Death with Dignity and the Right to Life continue unabated as technology creates challenges to the meaning of preserving life or allowing, even hastening, death.

ARE THE RECENT ABUSES WITNESSED IN THE NETHERLANDS BEING REPEATED IN THE UNITED STATES?

REFERENCES
1. Veith, Gene Edward. Feb. 2006. "Life-changing decisions." World:26.
2. Ertelt, Steven. Feb.23, 2009.http://www.lifenews.com/bio2762.html.
3. Ertelt, Steven. Nov.5, 2008. http://www.lifenews.com/bio2617.html.
4. Gordon, Carrie. 1997. Prescribing Death. Focus on the Family. Colorado Springs,CO.
5. Imbody, Jonathan. Jan/Feb 2001. "deadly Diagnosis in the Netherlands." Family Voice:6-12.
6. Dykxhoorn, Herminia. 1999. "Euthanasia in the Netherlands." http:www.euthanasia.com/Netherlands.html. 2.4.2009.
7. Msnbc.com news services. June 1, 2007. "Kevorkian released from prison after 8 years." http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/18974940. 2.4.2009.

Bias and Error in the Costly Death Penalty System

2009-02-14T08:36:00.001-08:00

BIAS IN DEATH PENALTY SENTENCING

It is clear that there is much bias in the administration of the death penalty in America.1.

Poor minorities make up a large percentage of the death penalty cases. It is rare that a rich person will be sentenced to death.

Blacks are disproportionately represented on death row. This historical bias was demonstrated in 1965 by Donald Partington, a Virginia lawyer. He documented that between 1908 and 1963 2,798 men had been convicted for rape or attempted rape in Virginia. All of the 54 executed were black. The bias continues into the present.

Gender bias is also evident. Although women commit 11.6% of the murders, only 1.4% of death row inmates are women. This may be related to the severity and circumstances of the crime.

Where a person commits a murder affects their chances of being put to death. Extreme disparity is seen in execution data listed in Statistical Abstracts between 1977 and 2005. During this time period, 871 executions are listed as occuring in the United States. Six states were responsible for executing 72% of the total number. Southern states predominate in death penalty sentencing.
While:
- 23 states carried out no executions, and
- 7 states carried out no more than 1-3 executions,
- Texas carried out 313 executions,
- Virginia carried out 89,
- Oklahoma carried out 69,
- Florida carried out 57,
- Missouri carried out 61,and
- Georgia carried out 34.

ERROR IN DEATH PENALTY SENTENCING

The finality of the death penalty raises concern about errors in sentencing.
This concern became severe following exonerations based on DNA evidence of more than 200 prisoners, including prisoners on death row.

Jurisdictions across the country are enacting policy reforms to protect against wrongful convictions. Inmates in all but eight states are now given access to DNA evidence that may not have been available at the time of trial.

In a 2005 study, Professor Samuel R. Gross found that between 1989 and 2003, 340 prisoners, 95% convicted of murder and rape, had been exonerated. DNA evidence was used to exonerate 144 of these inmates.
False witness identificaton was involved in half of the murder convictions and 88% of the rape convictions.

Peter J. Neufeld, a co-director of the New York City-based Innocence Project said that the legislation resulting from DNA exonerations is "probably the single greatest criminal justice reform in the last 40 years." 2.

Troy Anthony Davis has become synonymous with error in the death penalty system. Davis was sentenced to die in 1991 after being convicted of killing a policeman, despite lack of physical evidence. Since the trial seven of the nine witnesses came forward to say that they were coerced by police into identifying Davis as the gunman.
Amnesty International, death penalty abolition groups and thousands of concerned individuals, including President Jimmy Carter, Pope Benedict XVI, and Bishop Tutu, have challenged the perceived injustice.
Davis was granted a stay on his scheduled execution while the U.S. Supreme Court considered his petition. The court declined to hear the case. Another execution date was set that was stayed by the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals in Atlanta, Georgia.
Davis continues to wait and still faces execution. 3.

THE DEATH PENALTY IS COSTLY IN MORE WAYS THAN ONE

Concerns about the death penalty go beyond moral and emotional injustices. The death penalty is an expensive cost to the taxpayer compared to a sentence of life without parole.

The Dallas Morning News, in 1992, reported that "a death penalty case costs an average of $2.3 million, about three times the cost of imprisoning someone in a single cell at the highest security level for 40 years." 4.

Other states report similar extreme costs for the death penalty system. In 2007, California reported that it costs an additional $90,000 a year per inmate to confine an inmate on death row as opposed to those sentenced to life without parole. With California's death row population of 670, that accounted for $63.3 million annually. 5.

Richard C. Dieter, Executive Director of the Death Penalty Information Center,testified that death penalty cases require more time to prepare, more pre-trial motions filed, more experts hired, twice as many attorneys for the defense, more quizzing in jury selection, two trials conducted (for guilt and sentencing), and a series of appeals that come after conviction.6.

In 2000, the U.S. prison population reached 2 million prisoners, up from 1 million in 1995. The U.S. Justice Department reported that 461 of every 100,000 Americans were serving a prison sentence of at least one year.

C. M."Marty" Lensign, warden at Louisiana's Elayn Hunt Correctional Center, noted that cost effective alternatives were not sought because the incarceration business had a financial interest in perpetuating itself. He said, "We've used prison beds to stimulate the economy...In other words, it's an industry." 7.

RETHINKING THE DEATH PENALTY

Considering the bias, error and cost involved in administering the death penalty, there are many questions to be pondered.

The death penalty is viewed by some as a deterrent to future crime, but this is not generally supported by data. Conclusions from many studies show that the opposite is true. States that carry out higher numbers of executions actually have higher murder rates.

Supporters argue that "therapeutic vengeance" brings peace of mind and closure to victims or relatives of the crime. Others contend that laws and objectivity, not emotion, should control the process of justice. 8.

Texas is responsible for over 30% of the executions in the U.S.
A former district attorney of Bexar County, Texas, Sam Millsap, recognizes the fallibility of the death penalty system, saying that an honest assessment of the problems is overdue.
Millsap concludes,"When it comes to human life, a system that gets it right most of the time should not exist at all." 9.

REFERENCES:
1. Henslin, James M.2007. Sociology: A Down-to-Earth Approach. Boston:Allyn and Bacon:175-177.
2. New York Times. October 1, 2007. "DNA exonerations lead to key policy changes throughout the US". DPIC.http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/federal-executions-19270-2993.2/11/2009.
3. Lajoie, Ron. Winter, 2007. "Troy Davis' Day in Court". Amnesty International:6.
AIUSA. Winter 2008. "Letter from Death Row." Amnesty International:7.
4. Texas Death Penalty Education and Resource Center. Feb. 13, 2009. "Costs".
http://texasdeathpenalty.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=39<em=62.
5. DPIC. February 13,2009. "Financial Facts About the Death Penalty".
http://wwwdeathpenaltyinfo.org/costs-death-penalty.
6. Ibid.
7. Katz, Jesse. Feb. 19,2000. "U.S. prison population reaches 2 million mark." San Antonio Express News:16A.
8. Parrillo, Vincent N. 1999. Contemporary Social Problems. Boston:Allyn Bacon:133-134.
Sullivan, Thomas J. 2000. Introduction to Social Problems. Boston:Allyn Bacon:324
9. Millsap, Sam. Dec. 13, 2008. "Death penalty system fatally flawed." San Antonio Express News:8B.

Freedom of Choice Divides the Nation

2009-02-04T19:39:00.000-08:00

When Roe v. Wade was enacted in 1973 the U.S. engaged in a massive social experiment that the country was not ready for. Abortion became one of the most explosive, bitter and divisive conflicts on the American landscape.

The terminology used to discuss the issue has been crucial. Initially the terms pro-abortion and anti-abortion were used by the media to discuss the positions of the opposing sides. However, each side sought to use more positive images to package their viewpoints. Those supporting abortion rights favored the term pro-choice in support of a woman's right to control her body. Those opposed to abortion favored the term pro-life in support of the rights of the unborn child. 1.

The positions are emotional extremes with little room for compromise. The nation became torn and continues to be divided. In a 2003 Gallup survey, 47 percent of adults claimed to be pro-choice, while 46 percent claimed pro-life. 2.

SOCIAL PRESSURES TO ABORT

Since the legalization of abortion in the United States the pressures not to abort have been replaced by a multitude of social pressures encouraging abortion.
Industrialized countries now favor lower fertility. A woman may be discouraged from bearing a child by family or friends. Increasing data document that in many cases the choice to abort was not made by the woman but was forced upon her.

The Elliott Institute catalogs and examines the after effects of abortion, focusing on stress experienced by women. They report, "Pressures to abort can come from husbands, parents, doctors, partners, counselors or close friends and family. They may threaten or blackmail a woman into abortion...Coercion can escalate into violence." 3.

An abortion security guard testified that women "were routinely threatened and abused by the boyfriends or husbands who took them to the clinics to make sure they underwent their scheduled abortions. 4.

Research by Rue et. al. studied the relationship between induced aborton and traumatic stress. In a study of 548 women (331 Russian and 217 American) they noted that 64% of women who aborted felt pressured by others; 54% were unsure of their decisions; 67% received no counseling beforehand; 87% received inadequate counseling; 79% were not told about alternatives; 31% had health complication afterwards; and 65% of the American woman suffered multiple symptoms of post-traumatic stress disorders with 14% meeting all of the diagnostic criteria for post traumatic stress disorder. 5.

THE POLITICAL PROCESS UNFOLDS

Because abortion is intimately related to the value and meaning of human life and family, the disputes became acrimonious. A struggle ensured for political control over circumstances under which an abortion could be obtained. States became active in seeking to manage and control the circumstances surrounding abortion.

States Limit Abortion Practices

In January of 2009, the pro-choice Alan Guttmacher Institute summarized the laws that had been passed by states "limiting whether, when and under what circumstances a woman may obtain an abortion". 6.

*38 states require an abortion to be performed by a licensed physician.

*36 states prohibit abortion after a specified point in pregnancy, most often fetal viability, except to protect a woman's life or health.

* 14 states prohibit 'partial-birth' abortion.

* 32 states and the District of Columbia prohibit the use of state funds for abortion.

* 4 states restrict coverage of abortion in private insurance plans.

* 46 states allow individual health care providers to refuse to participate in abortion.

* 43 states allow institutions to refuse to perform abortions.

* 17 states mandate that women be counseled in regard to the purported link between abortion and breast cancer (6 states), the ability of the fetus to feel pain (8 states), mental health consequences (7 states) or the availability of ultrasound (6 states)

* 24 states require that a woman wait a specified period of time, usually 24 hours, between counseling and procedure.

* 34 states require parental involvement in a minor's decision to abort. 22 states require one or both parents to consent, while 10 require that one or both be notified.

Federal Protection for the Unborn/Born Alive Child

* The Born Alive Infant Protection Act, enacted into law in 2002, states that any baby born alive is legally a person and entitled to medical care. Failure to provide it is a crime.

* The Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Act, enacted into law in 2003, prohibits a late-term abortion called partial-birth abortion.

* The Unborn Victims of Violence Act ,enacted into law in 2004, was the first recognition of federal legal rights for an embryo or fetus as a person separate from the woman. This Act made it a separate federal crime to harm a fetus during and assault on the mother.

THE FREEDOM OF CHOICE ACT (FOCA)

This Bill was introduced in April of 2007 but failed to be reported to a committee.
The Freedom of Choice Act "declares that it is the policy of the United States that every woman has the fundamental right to choose to bear a child; terminate a pregnancy prior to fetal viability; or terminate a pregnancy after viability when necessary to protect her life or her health. It prohibits a federal, state, or local governmental entity from denying or interfering with a woman's right to exercise such choices..."

The Freedom of Choice Act was sponsored in the Senate by Senator Barbara Boxer and co-sponsored by 19 co-sponsors, including then Senator Barack Obama.

On July 17, 2007, Senator Obama spoke to the Planned Parenthood Action Fund. He said, "The first thing I'd do as president, is sign the Freedom of Choice Act." 7.

In discussing the Freedom of Choice Act, Brad Mattes, executive director of Life Issues Institute, said, FOCA "is a dangerous bill that President Barack Obama has promised to sign...FOCA... would kick to the curb every protective law that has been passed by Congress, state legislatures, or local communities." 8.

MORAL AND LEGAL AMBIGUITY

When does life begin and who should decide? Legal and moral ramifications lie at the core of decisions about abortion. Women, especially young women, are left in a state of ambiguous concern as to the value of the life of their developing child.

Although abortion became legal in the United States in 1973, Time magazine reported in January of 2003 that "53% of women between ages of 18 through 39 say they consider abortion an act of murder." Results of a TIME/CNN poll reported that 60% of 1,010 adult Americans agreed that it is "too easy for women today to get an abortion." 9.

The Alan Guttmacher Institute, Planned Parenthood's research affiliate, reported that since 1973 the total abortions in the U.S.through 2007 exceeded 49 million, 550 thousand.10.

The Freedom of Choice Act would create extreme and divisive moral confusion in our country.
A "NO" vote to FOCA is the wisest choice.

REFERENCES:1.
Craig, Barbara Hinkson and David M. O'Brien. 1993. Abortion and American Politics. Chatham House:Chatham, New Jersey.
2. Pisano, Marina. "Roe v. Wade at 30". San Antonio Express News. Jan. 20, 2003:1A.
3. Elliott Institute. After Abortion.org. Facts Sheets & Healing: The unChoice.com. 2/3/2009.
4. McQuarrie, Brian. "Guard, clinic at odds at abortion hearing." Boston Globe, April16, 1999.
5. Elliott Institute. After Abortion.org. Facts Sheets & Healing:The UnChoice.com.
Rue, V.M., P.K. Coleman, J.J. Rue, and D. C. Reardon. "Induced abortion and traumatic stress: a preliminary comparison of American and Russian Women." Medical Science Monitor. Sept. 23, 2004. Oc:10(10):SR5-16. E-pub.
6. Guttmacher Institute. "State Policies in Brief:An Overview of Abortion Laws".
www.guttmacher.org. January 1, 2009.
7. Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia. Jan. 30, 2009. "Freedom of Choice Act."
http://wn.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freedom_of_Choice_Act.
8.Butts, Charlie. Jan. 28, 2009. "The fight against FOCA begins."
http://www.onenewsnow.com/Printer.aspx?id-399060.
9. Tumulty, Karen and Viveca Novak. January 27, 2003. "Under the Radar-Thirty years after Roe v. Wade." Time. Vol. 161. No. 3:38-41.
10. National Right to Life. http://www.nrlc.org/ABORTION/facts/abortionstats.html.
2/2/2009.

Martin Luther King, Jr.'s Strength To Love

2009-01-19T12:59:00.001-08:00

Today, Martin Luther King Day of 2009, is a momentous occasion as we look forward to tomorrow when Barack Obama, the first African American president, will take the oath of office as the 44th president of the United States. Obama will be using the same Bible used by the 16th president, Abraham Lincoln, at his inauguration in 1861.

The American promise of equality and freedom rings true as people of all races gather on the Washington Mall from all over the country and the world to prepare for the inauguration of President Obama.

The gathering is reminiscent of and a consequence of the orderly demonstration of 250,000 people who gathered on the Washington Mall over 45 years ago on August 28th of 1963 for the March on Washington for Jobs and Freedom. It was here that the historic, I Have a Dream speech, was delivered by Dr. King as he stood in front of the Lincoln Memorial.

His speech, replayed in full over CNN news today, spoke of the future struggle for justice. He warned that the struggle would be hard and many would be imprisoned for their efforts. However, Dr. King said, "We must not be guilty of wrongful deeds, not drink from the cup of bitterness and hatred"...but rather move in the "high plain of dignity and discipline...meeting physical force with soul force.".

DIGNIFIED AND NON-VIOLENT

Dr King, other black ministers and leaders of the civil rights movement were insistent that the demonstrations for freedom would be controlled, orderly, dignified and non-violent. People who could not accept this condition were asked to leave. The strength, discipline and determination of these demonstrators spoke to the hearts of many Americans as they watched with horror on television the attacking dogs, water hosings and imprisonment of the demonstrators.

This powerful strength to love, in spite of past and present violence against them, was a convincing factor that led to the passage of the civil rights act of 1964 and the voting rights act of 1965.

The determination and ability of black leadership to speak truth to love laid the foundation of a a just society for all people.

As a Baptist minister at the Ebenezer Baptist church in Atlanta, Dr. King held firm to the teachings of Jesus. In 1963, he published a book of his sermons entitled Strength to Love.

The remaining portion of this entry will honor Dr. King's wisdom by presenting excerpts from one of his sermons entitled "Loving Your Enemies".

LOVING YOUR ENEMIES
from: Strength to Love. by Martin Luther King, Jr. 1963. Philadelphia: Fortress Press. pgs. 49-57.

Probably no admonition of Jesus has been more difficult to follow than the command to "love your enemies". Some have sincerely felt that its actual practice is not possible...Others, like the philosopher Nietzsche, contend that Jesus' exhortation to love one's enemies is testimony to the fact that the Christian ethic is designed for the weak and cowardly, and not for the strong and courageous. Jesus, they say was an impractical idealist...

Jesus is not an impractical idealist: he is the practical realist.

I am certain that Jesus understood the difficulty inherent in the act of loving one's enemy. He never joined the ranks of those who talked glibly about the moral life...

HOW DO WE LOVE OUR ENEMIES?

First, we must develop and maintain the capacity to forgive... Forgiveness does not mean ignoring what has been done or putting a false label on an evil act. It means, rather, that the evil act no longer remains as a barrier to the relationship. Forgiveness is a catalyst creating the atmosphere necessary for a fresh start and a new beginning.

Second, we must recognise that the evil deed of the enemy-neighbor, the thing that hurts, never quite expresses all that he is. An element of goodness may be found even in our worst enemy...

Third, we must not seek to defeat or humiliate the enemy but to win his friendship and understanding...
Every word and deed must contribute to an understanding with the enemy and release those vast reservoirs of goodwill which have been blocked by impenetrable walls of hatred...

LOVE IS AGAPE

Love is something much deeper than emotional bosh... An overflowing love which seeks nothing in return, Agape, is the love of God operating in the human heart. At this level, we love not because we like them... we love the person who does an evil deed, although we hate the deed that he does.

How can we be affectionate toward a person whose avowed aim is to crush our very being and place innumerable stumbling blocks in our path?...

When Jesus bids us to love our enemies he is speaking of Agape - understanding and creative, redemptive goodwill for all.

WHY SHOULD WE LOVE OUR ENEMIES?

The first reason is fairly obvious. Returning hate for hate multiplies hate, adding deeper darkness to a night already devoid of stars...

Another reason why we must love our enemies is that hate scars the soul and distorts the personality... Like an unchecked cancer, hate corrodes that personality and eats away its vital unity. It causes him to describe the beautiful as ugly and the ugly as beautiful, and to confuse the true with the false and the false with the true.

...Love is the only force capable of transforming an enemy into a friend. By its very nature, hate destroys and tears down; by its very nature, love creates and builds up.

Love transforms with redemptive power.

Vast Conclusions from Half Vast Data

2009-01-11T19:47:00.000-08:00

Recently a group of scientists, science teachers, and interested Texans went before the Texas State Board of Education and "pleaded with the 15 member board not to confuse public school children with a watered-down teaching of evolution by requiring teachers to teach its weaknesses or limitations".

This month the State Board of Education will take a preliminary vote on "new science curriculum standards that will dictate new science textbooks for the state's 4.5 million students".

Steven Schafersman, president of 'Texas Citizens for Science' told the board, "Scientists want to get rid of this weaknesses wording...Scientific theories don't have weaknesses."

Paul Kramer, a Texas engineer, countered this argument. He presented names of 700 scientists from around the world who doubt the claims for random mutation and natural selection. Kramer said that restricting debate is out of place in a free society. He said, "It smacks of oppression and tyranny and reminds us of another darker time in Germany where brown shirted, black-booted thought police burned books and crushed any free debate."

Educators around the United States watch closely to see the direction Texas moves because their decisions on controversial issues influence the content of books. 1.

SCIENTIST PRIESTS?

In the late 1960's Spencer Klaw examined the organization of the scientific community and scientific research in the United States. He concluded that "Science has become a form of established religion and scientists its priests and ministers." 2.

This conclusion was prophecied in the early 1800's when Auguste Comte, a French social thinker who was greatly concerned by growing social problems, contended that social relationships and society operate by laws that could be discovered through the application of scientific principles. He believed that 'scientist priests' could use the methods employed by the natural sciences to discover the natural laws of social relationships. These discovered laws would be used to develop a planned socialist society for the benefit of mankind that would replace the religious view of society based on the revelation of God's will. 3.

WAYS OF KNOWING

The world we live in is largely an unknown entity. We give meaning and understanding to the world around us through subjective experience, traditional authority, mystical understanding, and reasoned logic.

Increasingly, however, these personal ways of knowing are being supplanted by science, a systematic method that bases knowledge on observation of information that can be verified with our senses,

In the 1700's, the Age of Enlightenment ushered in an era of progress through science with an emphasis on human reason and scientific discovery. Only that which could be observed and verified scientifically was considered meaningful. Supernaturalism was viewed as outdated by the intellectuals of the time.

THE SCIENTIFIC METHOD

The scientific method is one mode of obtaining understanding about the world around us. Science is a way of generating and testing the truth of statements.

The process of scientific investigation attempts to overcome personal bias and preference by a reliance on an objective analysis of facts systmatically collected.

The scientific method consists of two processes: theorizing and research based on observable (empirical) information.

THE RESEARCH PROCESS 4.

* The process begins by defining the problem to be examined.

* Literature is reviewed which describes previous studies that have been done on the problem.

* A theory, which is a framework suggesting how two or more variable factors are related to each other, is developed.

* Through a process of logical deduction, an hypothesis is developed that predicts how one variable will affect or change another. An hypothesis is an If-Then statement. If (this) occurs then (that) will occur.

* A research method is developed to determine what data are to be collected and how they will be sampled and analyzed.

* The observations of the data are collected.

* The sample measurements are summarized.

* Generalizations are drawn from the conclusions as to whether the hypothesis was confirmed.

* The theory is confirmed or revised, depending on the results of the research.

QUESTIONS TO ASK OF RESEARCH

The value of research depends on accurate measurement of variables, a well drawn sample, and objective analysis of data.

Before the results of a scientific study are accepted as valuable, questions should be considered.

* What definitions were used to define the variables that were measured?

* How were the variables measured?

* Why was the research carried out?

* What were the motivations of the researchers?

* Who sponsored the research?

* What were the qualifications of the researchers?

* How large was the sample of observations and how was the sample drawn?

* Where was the sample drawn?

* When was the study done?

* Were all of the results considered in the conclusions?

CONCERNS WITH ADVOCACY RESEARCH

When a researcher studies a problem with an 'ideological imperative', politically acceptable findings may become more important than the quality of the research.

Research studies are often used to raise public consciousness toward acceptance for
a political agenda or to develop scientific legitimacy for social programs.

The temptation may be to distort the results by using only a portion of the data that supports the agenda or to widely over generalize the results to imply 'all' when only 'some' is appropriate.

SCIENTISM

Science, unfortunately, can be and sometimes is misused for political agendas. Merriam Webster defines scientism as "an exaggerated trust in the efficacy of the methods of natural science applied to all areas of investigation (as in philosophy, the social sciences, and the humanities)". 5.

Pbs.org. discusses scientism in this way. "Unlike the use of the scientific method as only one mode of reaching knowledge, scientism claims that science alone can render truth about the world and reality... Scientism sees it necessary to do away with most, if not all, metaphysical, philosophical, and religious claims, as the truths they proclaim cannot be apprehended by the scientific method. In essence, scientism sees science as the absolute and only justifiable access to the truth. 6.

AGAINST METHOD

Paul Feyerabend, professor of philosophy at the University of California, Berkeley, in his book, Against Method, contends that progress in science has not been made by following the scientific method. He notes that the gathering of facts are biased and distorted by theories and that the observation of facts are distorted by selective perception and prejudice.

Feyerabend observes that the scientific process is full of sordid personal controversy that comes closer to mob psychology than methodology.
He concludes that theories in science prevail not because they convince their opponents, but because they overpower them.

He believes that the search for truth must encompass a pluralistic methodology, including that of art, philosophy, religion and politics, because only a method that encourages variety is humanitarian. 7.

SEPARATION OF STATE AND SCIENCE

Feyerabend states, "As the accepting and rejecting of ideologies should be left to the individual, it follows that the separation of state and church must be supplemented by the separation of state and science, that most recent, most aggressive, and most dogmatic religious institution. Such a separation may be our only chance to achieve a humanity we are capable of, but have never fully realized". (pg. 295).

REFERENCES
1. Scharrer, Gary. "Scientists Speak up for Evolution". San Antonio Express News. November 20, 2008:B1.
2. Klaw, Spencer. The New Brahmins, Scientific Life in America. NY: William Morrow and Company, Inc. 1968:12.
3. Macionis, John J. Sociology: The Basics. Upper Saddle River, NY: Prentice Hall. 1997: Chapters 1 and 4.
4. Wallace, Walter. The Logic of Science in Sociology. Chicago: Aldine Press:1971.
5. Webster's Ninth New Collegiate Dictionary. Merriam Webster, Inc. Springfield, Mass. 1988:1051.
6. http://www.pbs.org/faithandreason/gengloss/scism-body.html. 1/11/2009.
7. Feyerabend, Paul. Against Method. Thetford, Norfolk, Great Britain: The Thetford Press Ltd. 1975.

Imagine No Religion. Impossible!

2008-12-26T20:23:00.000-08:00

The weeks before Christmas are a beautiful and magical time in our homes and communities. The rich and mellow carols of peace and goodwill echo in the streets, in the churches and over the media. Sharing, caring and giving are spread throughout the land.

However, in driving home the other day here in San Antonio, Texas I saw a large elaborate billboard that said, "Imagine No Religion". The billboard, promoted by the Freedom From Religion Foundation (FFRF) out of Madison, WI, is being placed in cities across the country. The FFRF, an association of atheists and agnostics, was formed in 1978 to promote freethought and to keep state and church separate. 1.

It is impossible to 'imagine no religion'. All persons and groups develop meaning systems that guide their decisions and behaviors which they then pursue with religious fervor.

In 1933, The Humanist Manifesto, contending that spiritual reality, worship, and prayer were false hopes, outlined the blueprint of faith for what they outlined as religious humanism based on science. 2.

In 1966, Anton Szandor LaVey contended that "The Church of Satan will be the pivotal point for an acknowledged belief system of the 21st Century". 3.

These religious faith systems, without any challenge or criticism, have become deeply involved with the state.

Nazism, Stalinism and Maoism were certainly organized as religions.

IMAGINE NO GOD!
THE POWER OF GOD PROTECTS FROM THE POWER OF THE STATE

When FFRF asks us to 'Imagine no religion' they are in reality asking us to imagine that there is no God, no higher power, no spiritual reality, or moral authority to which we are accountable, no reality or rightness that exists beyond human ability to manipulate or manage.

The attempt to remove the concept of God from our society raises deep and legitimate fears related to individual integrity, freedom and survival.

Faith in spiritual reality and authority is the sole liberating force which can supply freedom and integrity to individuals. Rights endowed by the state can be retracted by the state. Rights endowed by a Creator are beyond manipulation.

POWER TO CONTROL

Power is the ability to compel the will and action of another through influence, physical force, or intimidation. To gain total control rulers must control the authority structure, the distribution of rewards and punishments, and the surveillance mechanisms of society.

Dictators who seek to gain total control must eliminate alternatives which are beyond their ability to manipulate.

Social moral authority

In a discussion of the sources of moral authority in a sociology class, I mentioned The Ten Commandments as basic to Judeo/Christian moral understanding. A Muslim student in class raised his hand to correct me, saying "The Ten Commandments are basic to Judeo/Christian/Islamic moral understanding".

In our society, The Ten Commandments, The Sermon on the Mount, and the Declaration of Independence have been accepted as directives, truths, and inalienable rights endowed by the Creator.

Religious humanism, as outlined in The Humanist Manifesto, declares that modern science makes unacceptable inalienable human values.

The removal of The Ten Commandments from the foundation of our court system seeks to remove from our society faith in a transcendent authority and higher source of moral rightness beyond the state.

The radio commentator Dennis Prager said, "I regard the demise of Christianity in America (as a) nightmare - and I say that as a believing, religious Jew... The battle is no longer Jew versus Christianity, but Jew and Christian versus secular nihilism." 4.

Social Control

Social power requires control over the rewards that motivate people to strive and the punishments that deter. The rewards most available to managerial distribution are money, status and prestige.

Transcendent religions, however, maintain that the most desirous rewards relate to spiritual integrity rather than the transient rewards of personal gain.

Persecution for righteousness sake is the refining fire of the soul and 'great is your reward in heaven'. Attempts at coercion, harassment and intimidation lose their power to destroy, oppress and compel.

Social Surveillance

Control requires surveillance. In a nation that trusts in the all-seeing eye of a just God, control is maintained by bringing individuals into awareness of the expected and appropriate spiritual and social behaviors. People are then expected to control their own behaviors in light of this knowledge. With the elimination of the concept of God new types of surveillance must be used to ensure compliance with appropriate social norms.

STEPS TOWARD TOTAL POWER

Total power is not power for the 'good of the people' but rather power to determine what the people shall perceive as their good. It is the power to define or rather redefine right and wrong.
Transcendent religions which remove this authority from would be dictators must be destroyed by them.

A series of steps is used to de-program a society from the concept of spiritual authority, reward, and surveillance.

The first step is toleration. The word is used not as respect for religious seeking and diversity, but rather is used to imply endurance.

The second step is ridicule in the form of sarcasm, cartoons, and mocking caricature.

The third step is oppression. This includes deliberate obstruction through such avenues as economic sanctions and exclusion from the roles of social status, prestige and responsibility.

The fourth step is persecution and consists of physical harassment and removal and destruction through brainwashing or death

The most necessary step, however, is control over the shaping process of the children. Total control must be gained over the process whereby people learn to assign legitimate authority, reward, and surveillance.

VULNERABLE TO OPPRESSION

With the removal of the concept of spiritual reality and rightness, individuals are left ultimately vulnerable to being controlled (and crushed) by the capricious distribution of rewards and punishment.

The courage to dissent, the courage to live authentically, the courage to stand alone for what you believe to be right can only be born of the assurance that the ultimate rewards of personal integrity will surpass the immediate punishment.

The society that is unable to grant inalienable value, liberty and integrity to individuals cannot be good for the people.

REFERENCES:
1. Freedom From Religion Foundation. 12/18/2008. http://www.ffrf.org.
2. Humanist Manifesto I. The New Humanist. Vol. VI. No.3 (May/June) 1933.
http://www.jcn.com/manifestos.html.
3. Bugbee,Shane and Amy Bugbee. "The Doctor is in...MF Magazine.No.3.1997.
http://www.churchofsatan.com/Pages/MFInterview.html.
4. Laconte, Joe."The battle to define America turns violent". Christianity Today. Vol. 37. No. 12 (Oct 25) 1993:76.

The New Morality Threatens Us All.

2008-11-30T18:44:00.000-08:00

Fifty years ago Nikita Kruschev prophesied, "We will bury you". While this statement may be ambiguous, the direction our society has taken is not ambiguous. We have become willing accomplices in our own execution. We have dug our own graves.

LIBERATION NOW

In 1884, Friedrich Engels, the lifelong friend of Karl Marx and co-author of the Communist Manifesto, wrote a major citation of 'liberation' literature entitled "On the Origin of the Family, Private Property and the State". 1. This article outlined the blueprint for the liberation of men and women from binding family relationships and the 'oppression of monogamy'.

Engels saw two problems in the practice of lifelong, monogamous marriage. The first problem: after marriage a woman becomes the private property of her husband. Consequently unmarried men are able to find very few women willing to give themselves to them outside of prostitution. Engels contended that the exchange of sex love for money "degrades the character of the entire male world".

The second problem: marriage makes women the slave of their husbands. The husband earns and controls the economic base of the family, keeping the woman dependent upon him.

A NEW MORALITY

Engels proposed the solution to both of these problems by outlining a new morality and a new social order which involved:

* drawing "the entire female sex into public industry",

* making men and women equal "in rights and responsibilities",

* passing "the means of production into common property",

* abolishing the family as "the economic unit of society",

* transforming private housekeeping "into a social industry", and

* having society "take care of all children equally irrespective of whether they were born in wedlock or not".

SEX LOVE REPLACES COMMITTED FAMILY LOVE

Engels contended that this new social organization would give rise "to more unrestrained sexual intercourse, and along with it, a more lenient public opinion regarding virginal honour and feminine shame". The new moral standard for judging sexual intercourse would not be whether it is legitimate, but "whether it arose from mutual love or not."

From these changes will spring the new morality that Engels identified as Sex Love. "If only marriages that are based on love are moral, then also only those are moral in which love continues". Because "the urge of individual Sex Love differs," when affection is "displaced by a new passionate love", separation becomes a blessing.

Engels' new morality attacked and sought to overturn the behavioral and authority patterns of committed family practices. He outlined basic changes in social and personal interaction patterns and responsibilities.

OUR CULTURAL ORGANIZATIONS BOUGHT IT AND SOLD IT TO US.

In the last 50 years the mainstream media, liberal influences in the universities, and social legislation have replaced the foundation of family love with support for sex love.

When changes are made, some things of value may be gained but others are lost.

Can such ideas lead us to greater happiness, or will such disposable love lead us to the even greater oppression of our own passions?

CONSIDER THE CONSEQUENCES

# Before 1960, the expectation of marriage was to "love and cherish, till death us do part, for better or worse, for richer or poorer, in sickness and in health".

In 1960, the Uniform Marriage and Divorce Act outlined No-Fault divorce laws where fault was eliminated as a grounds for divorce. The first No-faultlaws were established in California in 1970, and within 10 years most of the other states followed. These laws removed power from the person wanting to remain married and gave it to the person wanting to leave a relationship.

The number of divorces in the United States rose rapidly, creating large numbers of single parent homes and emotional, financial, and structural problems for adults and children.

# Divorce accelerated the feminization of poverty. After divorce, the man's income generally rises, while the income of women and children falls, often drastically.

Children suffer in a divorce in many ways. Besides losing the nurturing presence of a parent, a study by the Census Bureau found that children could expect to become 37% poorer following the divorce of their parents. 2.
The effects of divorce on children often accumulate over time, getting worse instead of better. 3.

# Another troubling spinoff of divorce occurs when one parent, in violation of court orders, violates conditions of visitation or tries to remove a child from contact with the other parent. It is estimated that 350,000 parental abductions occur each year. The child is traumatized and the offending parent becomes a criminal. 4.

# Venereal disease has risen to epidemic proportions. Sex outside of committed, monogamous relationships has become normalized in our society, even among teens. In March of 2008, researchers at the federal Center for Disease Control announced that 1 in 4 teen girls has at least one sexually transmitted disease. The most common, the human papilloma virus, causes cervical cancer. The second most common, Chlamydia, can lead to infertility. 5.

The cumulative estimated deaths of persons with AIDS in the United States in 2005 was 530,307 persons. The first cases were reported in 1981 in the homosexual community. 77% of those affected with AIDS are male. Bisexual behaviors have transferred the disease to the heterosexual community. 6.

# In the wake of Roe v. Wade in 1973, more than 45 million abortions were performed in the United States by the year 2000. 80% of abortions are to unmarried women, and 52% are to women younger than 25 years of age. 7.

WHERE WILL THE CONSEQUENCES OF OUR BEHAVIOR END?

As we consider the acceleration of our descent into destruction, it becomes evident that we must change if we are to regain control of our relationships and our society.

If we are unable to remove the blinders from our eyes and see beyond the Pollyana smiles that tell us all is well, if we are unable to regain our moral convictions, and more importantly, the courage of our convictions, we may discover that the prophecy of Kruschev becomes the prophecy of the poet T.S. Eliot, who predicted:

THIS IS THE WAY THE WORLD WILL END.

This is the Way the World Will End.

this is the way the world will end.

Not with a BANG, but with a whimper.

References
1. Engels, Friedrich. "The origin of the family, private property, and the state". In: The Marx-Engels Reader. Robert C. Tucher (ed.) NY:Norton. 1978 (1884) pgs. 743-751.
2. Boublin, Gina. "Study: Children lose more than just parents in divorce." Bryan/College Station Eagle (TX) March 2, 1991.
3. Wallerstein, Judith. The Unexpected Legacy of Divorce: A 25 Year Study.
4. Child Abduction Statistics. The National Incidence Studies of Missing, Abducted, Runaway, and Throwaway Children (NISMART). http://www.lostchildren.org/statistics.htm. Nov. 28, 2008.
5. The Associated Press. March 11, 2008. http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/23574940.
6. Center for Disease Control Statistics. July, 2006. http://www.cdc.gov/hiv/resources/factsheet/print/msm.htm.
7. Center for Disease Control - Abortion Surveillance - U.S, 2000.

Be Wary of Socialism, Very Wary!

2008-10-24T16:47:00.000-07:00

Socialism is a vast bureaucracy dictated by the few for the good of the few and the control of the many. A small, elite governing body is responsible for making decisions. Socialism requires total control over the teaching of its citizenry and control over the relationships of its subjects. Citizens are asked, even required, to report their neighbor to government officials for even suspected violations of government directives.

NEED FOR CHECKS AND BALANCES

The beauty, freedom and strength of America, however, and of existence itself lies in a multiplicity of ideas and variations in cultural interpretations. This multiplicity of ideas maintains the checks and balances that prevent abuses of power and encourages evaluation and growth. It is the faith of the free system of government that open and honest debate provides a foundation where the general population can choose what form of laws and regulations will best serve the greatest good. The government is then held accountable to the people for its continuing existence.

U.S. MOVES TOWARD ECONOMIC SOCIALISM

As we watch the economic breakdown in the United States two weeks now before the election of a new president, it becomes evident that decisions by small, elite groups in both business and government have undermined our free economic system and replaced it with economic socialism. We have been misled and misdirected.

We are informed that it is in our best interest to move toward socialism in this time of economic crisis.

POLITICALLY CORRECT SOCIALISM

Socialism has been rampant in the universities for decades. I entered Cornell University to return to graduate school in the early 1970's, another era of social crisis. Watergate trials were playing non-stop on the television. The Vietnam war was waging. Minorities and women were challenging the university system for equal rights. The ideology being presented by the elite academic gurus was that we needed to move toward socialism. 'Benevolent dictatorship' was whispered to be the obvious solution. A chill ran down my spine, because 'benevolent dictatorship' is a contradiction in terms. Socialism continues to be 'politically correct' in the major universities.

In the 1800's, the historian and moralist, Lord Acton, noted the corrupting behavior of absolute power.
"POWER CORRUPTS AND ABSOLUTE POWER CORRUPTS ABSOLUTELY"

Germany, the Soviet Union, and other communist countries have shown us the tragedies related to socialist perspectives in governance, and how all citizens can be drawn into these tragedies.

Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn, in his book, The Gulag Archpelago, describes the atrocities of the Soviet prison system. He asks, "Where did this wolf-tribe appear from among our people? Does it really stem from our own roots? Our own blood? It is our own."
He concluldes, "If only there were evil people somewhere insidiously committing evil deeds, and it were necessary only to separate them from the rest of us and destroy them. But the line dividing good and evil cuts through the heart of every human being."1.

THE BANALITY OF EVIL

In 1961, Hannah Arendt reported on the trial of Otto Adolf Eichmann. She describes the banality of evil, noting that while the deeds Eichmann committed were monstrous, Eichmann, himself, was quite ordinary, neither demonic nor monstrous. What Arendt noticed was thoughtlessness, an inability to think. His responses were cliches, stock phrases, and standardized codes of expression.2.

We revolt in horror when we consider what was done in Nazi Germany by medical doctors. Robert Jay Lifton researched and reported the systematic genocide in Auschwitz and elsewhere. He noted that the Nazi motivation of 'killing as a therapeutic imperative' for the good of the Volk compelled medical doctors to participate in the Nazi eugenic vision. Doctors held no authority in deciding orders. They were powerless cogs in a vast machine, a faceless detached bureaucracy.3.

Lifton outlines the principle of 'doubling' which involves the formation of a second, relatively autonomous self, which enables one to participate in evil, while maintaining a prior self that continues as a family person and humane member of society.

CALL FOR CRITICAL THINKNG

Lifton notes that most Nazi doctors were not beasts, they were very ordinary people with families and children. However, the whole society failed to exercise the faculty of thinking critically.

Our present day 'preachings of political correctness' come dangerously close to careless and thoughtless cliches, stock phrases, and standardized codes of expression. We are being intimidated into accepting behaviors that render atrocious consequences.

Lifton concludes his discussions on doubling by saying, "In light of the recent record of professionals engaged in mass killings, can this be the century of doubling? Or, given the ever greater potential of professionalization of genocide, will that distinction belong to the twenty-first century? Or, may one ask a little more softly, can we interrupt the process - first, by naming it." 4.

COURAGE OF OUR CONVICTIONS

A crisis is that point in an illness where the patient either recovers or dies. The survival of democracy and the maintenance of the free citizen is dependent upon the vital reactivation of citizen awareness and critical thinking on the part of all. Most importantly, it requires the courage to speak out in support of our convictions.

REFERENCES:
1. Solzhenitsyn, Aleksandr. The Gulag Archipelago. In Literary Cavalcade. Jan. 1976. Vol. 28, No. 4. Pg. 41.
2. Assy, Bethania. "Eichmann, the Banality of Evil, and Thinking in Arendt's Thought". Pg. 1. http://www.bu.edu/wcp/Papers/Cont/ContAssy.htm.
3. Lifton, Robert Jay. The Nazi Doctors: Medical Killing and the Psychology of Genocide. Basic Books. (1986)2000. Pgs. 14-15.
4. Lifton, pg.465.

It's Not Our Economy, S-------. It's Our Character! What Happened To The Dream?

2008-10-13T14:18:00.000-07:00

The economy took a record breaking decline last week, 4 weeks before our presidential election, and the media pundits are telling us that this is all we should be concerned about. The candidates, Barack Obama and John McCain, roll out their strategies for economic recovery, although we know, and they know, that they don't have a clue as to what they will be able to do about this. There appears to be enough blame to go around.

As I watch the presidential debates, I am proud that Barack, Hillary, and Sarah have stood up to demonstrate their strength of leadership, alongside John and Joe. As a teacher and professor I have encouraged equal rights for all.

But I am concerned.

What is needed at this junction in history are leaders who have the WISDOM, WILL and COURAGE to help us restore a greater loss than money.

OUR BROKEN DREAM

On August 28th, 1963 my husband and I joined a carload from our (white, suburban) church to attend the March on Washington For Jobs and Freedom which was
organized by black ministers, including Dr.,Rev. Martin Luther King,Jr. We stood at the foot of the Lincoln Memorial as Dr. King challenged us to build a country where people were judged not by the color of their skin but by the content of their character. I believe that Dr. King, an eloquent Baptist minister, was calling us all to social, personal and moral responsibility.

Somewhere along the line the American Dream moved away from a focus on personal responsibility to a focus on personal indulgence and the acquisition of material goods. Hedonism was placed on the throne, with personal pleasure in the present as our primary goal.

THE DREAM TURNED PLASTIC

Credit card debt has become a major problem to many Americans. Beginning in the 1950's the convenience of plastic money enticed us into a compulsive consumer economy. Instead of saving and buying with cash, we were told that we can have it all now, so 'charge ahead'!

In 2004, the average family owed $8,000 on their credit cards. Credit card companies send us endless invitations telling us that we are preapproved to open an account. Even high school students receive them. 1.

We bought into it, buying cars, boats, houses and all the furniture.

SEX SELLS!

Sex represents the ultimate personal indulgence. Sex, a powerful motivator, is used to sell products.

Advertisements have long used provocative women and sultry men to sell products from cars to cigarettes. Perverse images of sexuality are presented repeatedly to sell us products every seven minutes. When we become bored with one level of perversity, the shock value increases to continue attracting our attention, regardless of what this is doing to our ability to respect each other and our relationships.

Previously young women were raised with the awareness that sex was related to babies and sexuality was sacred, something to be saved for motherhood and family.

When the 'pill' was introduced in 1960, sex for its own sake became possible. Women were enticed into presenting themselves as sexually available and spontaneous.

Young people were drawn into early and promiscuous sexual relationships with tragic consequences.

PERSONAL AND SOCIAL TRAGEDIES - SEX SELLS AND WE BOUGHT

The hard truth is that most personal and social problems are the result of our inability to protect and nurture caring family relationships. Female headed households became the single most reason for the rapid increase in poverty for women and children.

Births Out-of-Wedlock

In 1960, 4% of births were to unmarried women. By 2005, out-of-wedlock births accounted for 37% of babies born in the United States. 2.

* In 1950, five out of six black children were born into a 2 parent home, now 70% are born outside of marriage. 3.

Divorce

Following the establishment of no-fault divorce laws in the 1970's, the number of divorces increased rapidly, In 1970, 4 million Americans had divorced. By the year 2000, the number had grown to 22 million. 4.

* Divorce and separation rates for blacks are now 50% higher than for whites. 5.

Fatherless Homes

The breakdown of marriage and family led to fatherless households. Many men are removed from the responsible and nurturing role of parenting.

Sobering federal statistics report that children from fatherless homes include the large majority of behavioral problems, teen suicides, juveniles in detention, school dropouts, children in chemical-abuse centers, youth in prison, and homeless and runaway children. 6.

Abortion

Since Roe vs. Wade in 1973, more than 50 million abortions have been performed in the U.S. Over 80% of abortions were performed on unmarried women, and over 50% to women under 25. 7.

*In 2000, blacks made up 17% of live births but 36% of all abortions. 8.

Sexually Transmitted Disease (STD)

By March of 2008, 1 in 4 teen girls had at least one STD. The most common, the human papilloma virus causes cervical cancer. The second most common, chlamydia, can lead to infertility.

*Nearly half of black teens had one or more STD's. 9.

By 2005, AIDS in the U.S. had claimed over 530,000 lives. The first cases were reported in the U.S. in 1981 in the homosexual community. 77% of those infected with AIDS are males.

*Blacks represent 12% of the U.S. population, but represent over 50% of accumulated AIDS cases. 10.

Bisexual and casual sexual behaviors transferred this disease to women. In 2005, of the 126,964 women living with HIV/AIDS in the U.S., 64% were black, 19% were white, and 15% were Hispanic. 11.

ALCOHOL ABUSE 12.

The tragedies of nicotine use and illegal drugs cause immense personal and social problems, but my focus here is on problems caused by the legal and socially accepted drug of alcohol.

Alcohol is used for sociability in our society and advertisers present it as the life of the party, without presenting the tragic consequences that often result.

Binge drinking is a major problem at colleges. Even one-third of high school students report binge drinking.

Alcohol impairs muscular coodination and mental judgment and is responsible for 22% of all auto fatalities. Over 17,000 deaths occur each year in alcohol related accidents.

The bill for alcohol related abuse may run as high as $100 billion a year in responding to lost employment, crime, date rape, family abuse and family breakdown.

About 43% of adults have experienced alcoholism in their family.

Each year 5,000 children are born with fetal alcohol syndrome.

A CALL FOR WISDOM, WILL AND COURAGE

In three weeks we will vote for the next president of the United States of America.

Who will have the wisdom, will, and courage to call us to restore the content of our character?

Who can lead us back to citizenship and social, personal, and moral responsibility so the foundation of our country can be protected and restored?

There is enough blame to go around.

Let's all decide to get rich a little bit slower and care for each other.

REFERENCES
1. "Secret History of the Credit Card". Frontline. Posted Nov. 23, 2004. http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/credit/view.
2. Associated Press. Nov. 21, 2006. MSNBC.com.
3.Cosby, Bill and Alvin F. Poussaint, MD.Come On People. Thomas Nelson. Nashville. 2007:2,14.
4. Henslin, James M. Social Problems. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall. 2000:371
5. Cosby, pg. 17.
6. Alexander, Mark M. "Fatherless in America". June 17, 2005. www.townhall.com/Common.
7. Center for Disease Control- Abortion Surveillance - U.S. 2000.
8. Lott, John R. and Sonya D. Jones. "Abortion Rate Among Black Women Far Exceeds Rate for Other Groups". April 9, 2008. http://www.foxnews.com.
9. The Associated Press. March 11, 2008. http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/23574940.
10. Center for Disease Control HIV/AIDS. 9/8/2007. http://www.cdc.gov/hiv/topics/surveillance.
11. HIV/AIDS Among Women. 5/26/2008. http://www.cdc/gov/hiv/topics/women/resources/factsheets.
12. Henslin, James M. Social Problems Prentice Hall. Saddle River, NJ. 2000:105-106.
Palen, J. John. Social Problems for the Twenty-first Century.McGraw Hill. 2001:370-371.
Parrillo, Vincent N., John Stimson and Ardyth Stimson. Contemporary Social Problems. Allyn and Bacon. 1999:58-59.

Economic Socialism Endangers Our Freedoms!

2008-10-01T12:01:00.000-07:00

OUR FREEDOMS AT STAKE!

Our very freedoms are at stake in the horrendous request that asks taxpayers to give the government SEVEN HUNDRED BILLION DOLLARS of their hard earned money to bail out fiascos on wall street.

Our free enterprise system is the foundation that allows many voices to be heard and considered and many enterprises to be established to support values.

IT'S TIME TO STOP ALL THE POLITICAL RHETORIC AND INVESTIGATE WHAT AND WHO IS RESPONSIBLE FOR THIS DEBACLE.

Giving government bureaucrats at the treasury department centralized control over the money available for making business loans and more importantly giving them the authority to decide the eligibility rules as to who will receive these loans moves us into the realm of economic socialism.

Government bureaucracies are under the control of 'political correctness' that is being orchestrated by the far left. This concern becomes evident as we examine government control of the public school system.

POLITICALLY CORRECT BUREAUCRATS AND THE PUBLIC SCHOOLS

Moral and religious values of many, I would suggest most, of the students and parents are held in contempt as educational bureaucrats use the public school system to present promiscuous teenage sexuality, homosexuality and abortion as normalized behaviors, even in the elementary grades.

The importance of our religious values and heritage are dismissed within the public schools. My own 8 year old grandson informed me that "We're not allowed to talk about God in school".

As a teacher and professor I have sat through at least 4 extended 'politically correct' indoctrination sessions incorrectly promoted as diversity training. I have watched students and teachers who were 'put down' or even dismissed from their profession for failing to buy into the 'diversified indoctrination".

POLITICALLY CORRECT BUREAUCRATS AND OUR ECONOMIC SYSTEM

Now we want to put government bureaucrats in charge of deciding who or what economic loans are justified and possible? Will similar 'politically correct' criteria be used to make these decisions? Will health industries, private schools, books stores, theaters, department stores, etc. first be required to adjust their offerings to 'political correctness' before they can receive loans? Will the 'I Love Jesus Tire and Brake Service' be required to change its name before a loan is made?

Our foremothers and forefathers, often leaving all behind, came to this country to escape the tyranny of government control over their minds and souls.

Our greed to consume is undermining the spiritual and moral values that have made our country strong. The demand for easy credit and living beyond our means is undermining our integrity.

Dying of consumption is not a good way to go!

IT'S TIME TO EXAMINE OURSELVES! IT'S TIME TO BE ECONOMICALLY RESPONSIBLE AND PROTECT OUR ECONOMIC FREEDOMS!

Holy Humanism! It's Politically Correct!

2008-09-20T11:16:00.000-07:00

Political correctness has become the mantra of our present day culture. Where did it come from and what is involved in this often intimidating social trend?
The blueprint for political correctness is summarized in two articles of 'faith': Humanist Manifesto I and Humanist Manifesto II.

HUMANIST MANIFESTO I- POLITICAL CORRECTNESS IS BORN

In 1933, 34 people signed the Humanist Manifesto I with the intent of establishing a new religion. Included within this group were professors of major universities and ethical societies. Fifteen signers were Unitarians. Included in this group was the educator, John Dewey.

This document outlined the premises of this new religion.
"Today man's larger understanding of the universe, his scientific achievements, and deeper appreciation of brotherhood, have created a situation which requires a new statement of the means and purposes of religion...To establish such a religion is a major necessity of the present...We therefore affirm the following." 1.

* The universe is self-existing, not created. Man is a continuous process of nature. The idea of dualism of mind and body must be rejected. Life exists only in the 'here' and 'now'.

* Modern science makes unacceptable inalienable human values.

* Worship and prayer must be replaced by a sense of personal life and social well-being.

* Religious institutions must be reconstituted as rapidly as possible to function in this new world.

* A socialized and cooperative economic order must be established.

HUMANIST MANIFESTO II - POLITICAL CORRECTNESS GROWS UP!

In 1973, a second manifesto was published. In this document, caution was expressed in discussing the 'faith' of 1933.
"Events since then make that earlier statement seem far too optimistic... Nazism has shown the depths of brutality of which humanity is capable...Science has sometimes brought evil as well as good." 2.

However, the 1973 document continues to deny traditional theism.

"As in 1933, humanists still believe that traditional theism, especially faith in the prayer-hearing God, assumed to live and care for persons, to hear and understand prayers, and to be able to do something about them is an unproved and outmoded faith."..."The next century can and should be the humanistic century." 2.

This statement affirms a "design for a secular society on a planetary scale". Technology is outlined as the key to human progress, with the 'faith' that scientific research should not be censored. Traditional religions are outlined as the obstacles to human progress.

* There is no divine purpose or separable soul.

* The use of the scientific method must be extended.

* Participatory democracy must be extended to the economy, school, family, workplace, and voluntary associations.

* The state should be responsible to encourage freedom for different moral, political, religious, and social values.

* Ethics must be considered autonomous and situational.

* Civil liberties must be extended to include:
- the right to die
- the right to euthanasia
- the right to suicide
- the right to birth control
- the right to abortion
- the right to divorce
- the right to many varieties of sexual behaviors between consenting adults.

Humanist Manifesto II proposes the development of a system of world law and world order based on a transnational federal government. This world community must renounce violence and engage in cooperative planning. The writers have 'faith' that global scientific socialism will lead to world progress and brotherhood.

The document of 1973 was signed by 118 people each of whom listed an affiliation with an organized group. Included in this group were over 40 professors at major universities and 30 leaders of ethical, humanist, rational and Unitarian societies. Among those signing were the author Isaac Asinov, the Russian dissident Andrei Sakkarov, and the behavioral psychologist, B. F. Skinner.

THE NEW RELIGION IS POLITICALLY CORRECT!

The above 'faith' statements represent the 'religion' that is being taught in our universities and our public schools. Although the ideas in the manifestos are stated in positive terms of brotherhood, peace, goodwill, human happiness, and human potential, the documents are replete with hidden agendas for far-reaching societal change.

Democracy is held up as an ideal for this new society. However, the tone of the articles is one of command. The words 'must' and 'should' appear repeatedly throughout the documents.

The proposals in these documents constitute major changes in religious, social, and political organization. What is outlined is global scientific socialism, devoid of spiritual or eternal reality.

SPEAK OUT!

Because the affirmations in these documents have been stated as imperatives, it becomes imperative that we, as students, educators, parents and citizens, study these proposals, discuss the extent of their influence in our educational system, anaylze the textbooks being used, and consider whether this is the direction in which we want to proceed, whether this is the religion we want taught in our public school systems.

Then we must make our voices heard! In the community, the school systems, in the legislature.

1. Humanist Manifesto I. The New Humanist. Vol. VI. No. 3 (May/June) 1933.
http://www.jcn.com/manifestos.html.

2. Humanist Manifest II. The New Humanist. Vol. XXXIII. No. 5 (Sept/Oct) 1973.
http://www.jcn.com/manifestos.html.

When Organizations and Families Collide

2008-08-10T18:05:00.000-07:00

Most Americans continue to find their greatest sources of nurture, support, and meaning within their family experiences.

In our modern society, however, we are spending an increasing amount of time in bureaucratic organizational involvements, away from our families.

Organizations, while offering support and services for families and individuals, may challenge and compete with family involvements. Organizations may view members as commodities to expand and increase the organizational program, with little thought or concern about how the involvements may affect relationships within the family unit.

Social analyst, Eugene Litwak, contends that both organizations and strong family relationships are essential for the maintenance of an industrial society. He notes that organizations provide efficient, objective, transitory, and specialized services, while the family and kinship units provide the personal, emotional, diffuse, and permanent support and guidance necessary for personal development. 1.

THE FAMILY REALM IS DIFFERENT

The family realm differs from relationships in bureaucratic organizations. The expectations for interactions within these two realms are usually quite different.

Researchers in the Department of Family Sciences of Brigham Young University identified seven characteristics that distinguish the 'ideal' family realm from organizational experiences. 2.

1. Family relationships are generational and permanent.

* Organizations have specific goals of interest for a limited time period.

2. Family relationships involve 'whole persons' for better and worse with respect for the unique qualities of the members.

* Organizations involve people in a 'role' relationship, structured to avoid
contradictions.

3. Family relationships are multidimensional. Many processes are occurring at once, often becoming irrational and disordered. Actions and feelings must be juggled simultaneously.

* Organizational activities are focused, sequential, ordered, and temporary.

4. Families develop emotional intensity that includes not only feelings of love, but also feelings of concern worry, and anger.

* Feelings toward organizational colleagues are less intense and holistic.

5. Family relationships focus on measures of the quality of 'being' in an ongoing process of nurture.

* Organizations focus on quantity measures of achievement, profit, performance,
ratings, and rankings.

6. Family relationships include a sense of sacred responsibility and duty to other family members.

* Organizations include agreements and contracts for mutual advantage.

7. Family relationships are based on processes of caring, nurturing, persuading, and training to foster the growth and development of the members.

* Organizations treat members as commodities where people are hired, fired,
managed and manipulated.

LEARNING HOW TO LOVE FOREVER - EDUCATION FOR HEALTHY MARRIAGES AND FAMILIES

Our social education programs are failing to educate citizens in the skills necessary for the success of healthy marriage and family relationships. Without the ability to care and share, listen and communicate, manage anger, resolve conflicts and forgive, relationships within families become destructive and broken.

In 1995, the Council on Families, which includes prominent social researchers and proponents of religious and social policy, issued a report entitled Marriage in America: A Report to the Nation. They contend that "The divorce revolution...has failed. It has created terrible hardships for children, incurred unsupportable social costs, and failed to deliver on its promise of greater adult happiness... Making marriage in America stronger will require a fundamental shift in cultural values and public policy. No one sector of society is responsible for the decline in marriage... We are all part of the problem, and therefore we all must be part of the solution." 3.

The Council on Families concludes that educational, religious, civic, business, political, and health organizations must all work together to regain the personal
and social value of marriage and family relationships.

In light of the importance of continuing family relationships for personal support, and concerns for the tragic breakdown of family relationships and social cost to individuals and society, it is essential that our educational organizations, including our schools, churches and other community support groups, offer training in the unique processes that support marriage and family nurture and enrichment.

WE CAN LEARN TO LOVE FOREVER! It's time to move forward and make it happen!

REFERENCES:
1. Litwak, Eugene. "Extended kin relations in an industrial society." In
Social Structure and the Family: Generational Relations.E. Shanas and B.F. Streib. Englewood Cliff, NJ: Prentice Hall. 1965:290-323.

2. Beutler, Ivan R., Wesley R. Burr and Kathleen S. Bahr. "The family realm: theoretical contributions for understanding its uniqueness." Journal of Marriage and the Family. Vol.51(August)1989:805-816.

3. Council on Families. Marriage in America: A Report to the Nation. 1995.
www.americanvalues.org/html/r-marriage_in_america.

Texas Leads in Marriage Strengthening Programs

2008-07-28T17:16:00.000-07:00

On June 15th of 2007, the Governor of Texas signed into Law 2 bills designed to support the development of healthy marriages and families:
House Bill 2683 - Strengthening Families
House Bill 2685 - Marriage Preparation Courses 1.

PUBLIC POLICY CONCERNS

Building strong families is a public policy concern because the dissolution of marriage and families creates social problems which require the state to spend large amounts of money through child support collection, food stamps, government health insurance and correctional facilities. 2.

Federal law makes federal grants available to state governments from the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) block grants and from the Safe and Stable Families block grants. However, only a few states, including Oklahoma and Ohio, use these grants. 3.

By supporting these two bills, Texas will lead the nation at the state level in promoting programs to give families tools to succeed in marriage and family relationship skills.

HB 2683 - STRENGTHENING FAMILIES

This bill, which became effective on September 1, 2007, approved $15 million in federal TANF funds for programs "to promote healthy relationships, and child well-being and to reduce the risk of domestic violence." 4.

HB 2685 - MARRIAGE PREPARATION COURSES

This bill, which will become effective on September 1, 2008, encourages applicants for marriage licenses to take voluntary marriage preparation courses.

HB 2685 also increases the fee for a marriage license from $30 to $60. However, couples who choose to undertake an 8 hour marriage preparation course will be exempt from paying the marriage license fee and also exempt from the 72 hour waiting period between the issuing of a license and the date of marriage.

The marriage preparation courses must include instruction in conflict resolution and communication skills. The courses offered must be based on research and provided by a certified instructor.

The Texas Health and Human Services Commission (HHSC) maintains a website under the "Twogether in Texas" Healthy Marriage Program to register trained marriage educators, make information available to the public, and ensure that the premarital education courses offered meet appropriate standards. The state has been divided into 12 regions with intermediaries who oversee the program. 5.

Education programs funded by the state must use secular and qualifying curriculum, and offer the classes free of charge.

Education programs not funded by the state can use faith-based curriculum if it is
certified as a recognized premarital curriculum. These programs must be registered with the Regional Intermediaries of "Twogether in Texas" in order for recipients to receive the marriage fee exemption.

IT'S TIME TO ADDRESS THE PROBLEM.

"Encouraging couples to undertake premarital education courses is intended to provide them with the skills necessary to resolve marital conflicts, which will make for stronger marriages that are less likely to end in failure. It is indisputable that marriage has a positive impact on the well-being of adults, children, and families, and that it improves satisfaction with life and fosters economic stability." 6.

State Representive, Warren Chisum, R-Pampa, sponsored the legislation that developed the programs for healthy family education. He said, "With the frequency of divorce and problems we have with marriage in this state, it's time someone addressed the problem." 7.

REFERENCES
1. www.capitol.state.tx.us/BillLookup/BillNumber.aspx. July 30, 2008.
2. Legislative Update. Friday, July 13, 2007.
http://www.house.state.tx.us/news/release.php?id=2126.
3. Texas FAMLI. http://tx.famli.us/content/view/1/1/.
4. Leeks, Gordon. Project Manager, Healthy Marriage Program. Texas Health and
Human Services Commission. Power Point presentation. 6/6/08. "Twogether in
Texas".
5. Ibid.
6. Legislative Update. (as above)
7. Hodges, Sam. "Texas Marriage Education Program aims to prevent divorce."
The Dallas Morning News. July 4, 2008.
http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dws/dn/religion/stories/070508
dnmetmarriageclass.23f2125.html.

How's the Weather Inside? A Workshop for Marriage Enrichment

2008-07-11T15:04:00.000-07:00

Yes,you can do it! Plan a workshop for marriage enrichment.

"America has the highest rate of marriage of any industrialized nation...(and) the highest divorce rate in the world. Most of the world views the American pattern of marriage and divorce not as a model to be copied but as a disaster to be avoided."1.

David Mace, the founder of the Organization for Couples in Marriage Enrichment, stated, "I believe we must find ways to kindle new hope in them that their marriages can really be much more satisfying and rewarding." 2. Marriage enrichment is not therapy or counseling. Rather it is educational and learning exercises in better communication skills.

Communities across the country are beginning to realize the need for education in marriage and family relationships. Churches, civic groups and schools are providing classes and seminars for couples and parents to learn the importance of family and to learn skills to stay connected. 3.

There are many resources available to help organize programs for marriage enrichment.

This workshop, conducted within a church setting, was guided by discussions and exercises found in the book: The Marriage Mender: A Couple's Guide to Staying Together. 4.
Thoughtful popular songs were used throughout the program.

======================================================
A Workshop for Marriage Enrichment:
HOW'S THE WEATHER INSIDE? GETTING TO SUNSHINE THROUGH THE STORM.

Every marriage has many storms to weather as life progresses and changes. Marriage enrichment activities develop skills in affirming each other, conflict resolution and communication.

9:00 Opening Session/ Introduction'
Song: Singin'in the Rain -"I'm laughing at clouds so dark up above.
The sun's in my heart and I'm ready for love."5.
9:30 Workshop I - Charting the Storms and Clouds / Rainbows and Sunshine
Song: Suddenly There's a Valley - "When a storm hides the distant rainbow, and you think you can't find a friend" 6.
10:45 Break
11:00 Workshop II - Calming the Storm - Conflict Resolution Skills
Song: You'll Never Walk Alone - "When you walk through a storm hold your head up high". 7.
12:15 Lunch
1:15 Workshop III. Seeing Through the Clouds - Clear Communication
Song: Sing a Rainbow -"Listen with your eyes and sing everything you see." 8.
2:30 Break
2:45 Workshop IV - Rainbows and Sunshine - Creating Intimacy
3:45 Concluding Thoughts

======================================================

WORKSHOP I. CHARTING THE STORMS AND CLOUDS / RAINBOWS AND SUNSHINE
(The Marriage Mender - Chapters one and two)

Couple exercise.
Each person, anonymously, makes a list of 3 serious problems and 3 valuable assets in their marital relationship. The lists are turned in and written on overhead charts for future discussion and reference. This exercise helps husbands and wives realize that many of their experiences are common to other couples.

Expectations
We enter marriage with many myths about what marriage should be: 'my mate will always love me, share my values, and understand my feelings and needs'.

Then we wake up to discover, "I didn't marry myself!"

Our problems come from 3 areas of differences:
* opposites attract
* men and women are different
* each partner comes from a different family-of-origen.

Unrealistic expectations can lead to resentment and anger unless they are realistically examined and discussed.

Three inevitable stages of love and marriage:
Infatuation - Negotiation- Mature Love

Romance and infatuation
This is a wonderful period in a relationship. It allows for the bonding and attachment necessary for a marriage to take place. A feeling of 'US' pervades.

TV, movies, music, and romance novels deceive us into thinking that love will always be exciting and unconditional.

Romance is a transient stage that we move through into the stage of negotiation.

Negotiation
This stage occurs when the partners realize that they are not getting all their needs met. A feeling of 'ME' occurs when expectations are shattered and energized conflict develops. A committed process of communication, listening, compromise and forgiveness is required to work through the differences.

Without a concerted effort to understand and grow together, destructive patterns lead to stalemate, boredom, and autonomy, or separation and divorce.

Mature Love
Mature love requires the commitment to appreciate each other's uniqueness, to communicate, and be flexible enough to meet each other's needs. The feeling of 'US' returns as each partner accepts the responsibility to honor and appreciate differences and work through the give and take of daily activities.

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++

WORKSHOP II - CALMING THE STORM - CONFLICT RESOLUTION SKILLS
(The Marriage Mender. Chapters four and eight)

Accepting Conflict
Couples don't fight because they don't like each other, but because they do.

Conflict is natural. If people live together, they will experience conflict.
We are each made differently. Each family member has a built-in need to protect their uniqueness.

Conflicts arise out of personal values, beliefs, and needs.
Conflict is something to be resolved, not something to be avoided.

Conflict in families is an opportunity to recognize each other's needs and uniqueness and to celebrate differences.

Conflict is an opportunity to grow closer together.

Making your marriage and family a place of safety
We are created with a defense system to protect us from danger. This doesn't always help us form intimate relationships.

When conflict occurs in marriage, there is fear... of being emotionally wounded, of losing our mate, of our weaknesses being exposed.

You fight because you don't feel safe. When you and your spouse hiss at each other like threatened animals, you must lessen the threat.

What does safety look like?
It starts with respect...partners take time to listen, understand and respond.
Partners are there for each other.

Solutions
Decide to disarm.
Write it down and contract to being a safer partner.
Open closed hearts and minds to each others needs.

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

WORKSHOP III. SEEING THROUGH THE CLOUDS - CLEAR COMMUNICATION
(The Marriage Mender - Chapters five and six)

Words have power. Choose them carefully.

Words can hurt, injure, anger and alienate or they can heal, help, comfort and soothe.

"We are always communicating. It is impossible not to communicate... The irritable look, the silence, the lack of touch - all of these communicate".

Anger
Anger keeps many couples from expressing feelings. Anger is a shield for other emotions we don't know how to express, such as hurt, fear, sadness or tiredness.

Active Listening
We cannot overestimate the need that people have to be truly listened to. We all need to feel that we are heard, without being judged or criticized.

Active listening involves context and content.
Context includes paying attention to the message conveyed by nonverbal signals: body language, facial expression, voice tone, and inflection. (This requires putting down the newspaper or turning away from the television.)
Content requires reflection on the meaning of what was said.

Restatement
Effective listening involves restating to the person your understanding of what you heard. Restatement allows a person to feel that he or she has been heard.

The B-E-A-R method. An exercise for couples
Choose a recent event that caused you to experience some emotion toward your spouse and complete the four components.
B - (Behavior) Describe the behavior
E - (Emotion) Describe the feeling you had about the behavior.
A - (Alternative) Describe an alternative behavior you would have preferred.
R - (Result) Describe the consequence resulting from your requested alternative.

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

WORKSHOP IV - RAINBOWS AND SUNSHINE - CREATING INTIMACY
(The Marriage Mender - Chapters eight, nine and ten)

Develop habits in your marriage to learn effective conflict resolution skills.

Win-win situations- Find ways in which both of you can win each conflict.

De-escalate -When conflicts arise agree on a gesture indicating that a timeout is needed. The person calling timeout is responsible for making a return appointment to continue the discussion.

Accentuate the positive - Research shows that it takes 5 or more positive compliments to overcome a negative. Compliment your spouse on what he or she is doing right. Do it often.

Use what works - Make a list of ways that have worked in the past to overcome conflicts.

Stop doing what doesn't work - Don't continue 'the same old song and dance' if it isn't working. Try a new dance step.

Keep the big picture in mind - Keep a realistic view of where you have been and where you are headed and the good things about your relationship. Write them down.

It takes time - Encourage each other as you develop new skills.

Pursue forgiveness
Forgiveness - takes a spirit of humility,
- requires hard work
- needs time
- requires an open spirit
- is a continuing process.

CELEBRATE!
Go out to dinner, take a mini-vacation, make love - find some way to recognize your successes in relationships.

=======================
References
1. Social Problems for the Twenty-First Century. J. John Palen. McGraw Hill.
2001:278
2. Mace, David. Building Better Marriages. Association for Couples in
Marriage Enrichment. March-April 2003. Vol. 32. No 2. pg.1.
3. *McManus, Mike. Marriage Savers. www.marriagesavers.org.
*Baumgarnder, Julie. "Marriage First: How a city restored families".Focus on the
Family. August 2006. pgs 16-17.
4. Whiteman, Ph.D., Thomas A. and Thomas G. Bartlett, Ph.D. The Marriage Mender:
A Couple's Guide for Staying Together. 1996. Navpress.
5. Singin' In The Rain. 1929. Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer,Inc. Lyrics by Arthur
Freed. Music by Nacio Herb Brown.
6. Suddenly There's a Valley.1955.Warman Music.by Chuck Meyer & Biff Jones.
7. You'll Never Walk Alone. MCMXLV. Williamson Music, Inc. Words by Oscar
Hammerstein. Music by Richards Rodgers.
8. Sing a Rainbow. 1955. Mark VII Music. Words and Music by Arthur
Hamilton.

It Pays to Enrich Your Marriage and Family!

2008-06-24T19:57:00.000-07:00

We're losing it!

Too many of us have already lost it!
As our homes and families dissolve in angry confrontations and/or divorce, we're
losing too much of value.

I'm out of here!
The development of no-fault divorce laws in the 1970's made it easy to end a marriage. Increasingly, people found it easier to leave a marriage than to work through even natural and normal problems of family disagreement. Divorce often, even usually, leaves one partner feeling betrayed and the children feeling rejected and deserted.

Don't lose it!

The majority of Americans continues to find their greatest sources of nurture, support, and meaning within their family experiences. Strong marriages build a strong foundation for parenting children.

LET'S INVEST IN MARRIAGE ENRICHMENT.1.

Today's marriages must be held together from the inside - by the actions of the partners themselves.
Marriages have to be strong enough to withstand the stress and lifetime of changes that occur during adulthood.
In addition, most couples have high expectations for their marriages. They expect joy and fulfillment - not just survival.

Excellent marriages do not just happen.
It's a decision to 'make our love last'.

Marriage enrichment is the process of making marriage better, happier and more satisfying. Marriage enrichment activities develop skills in affirming each other, conflict resolution and caring communication.

Learning to Love!

Marriage enrichment is different from marriage counseling or therapy. It's an educational learning process. By taking a growth and educational approach rather than treatment, marriage enrichment can benefit any couple.

An excellent source for information on programs and processes of marriage enrichment can be found at www.bettermarriages.org. This is the website of the Association for Couples in Marriage Enrichment.

Check it out!

Marriage enrichment is the best investment you can make for yourself, your future, your children, and your family!.

1. "Building Better Marriages." Brochure of ACME. Association for Couples in Marriage Enrichment. Winston Salem, NC. www.bettermarriages.org.

The High Cost of Marriage Breakdown in America

2008-06-17T18:45:00.000-07:00

The breakdown of marriage in America has become our most critical social problem.

Since the beginning of recorded history, marriage has been a universal human institution. Marriage creates kinship obligations, resource pooling, and the reproduction of children, families and society. Marriage offers an expectation of sexual fidelity and lifelong commitment which supports happier, healthier and less violent relationships. 1.

Over the last 40 years we have moved away from support and expectation of marriage in America. Divorce, out-of-wedlock childbearing, and co-habiting have become normalized as alternative lifestyles.

A report released in 2005 entitled, Why Marriage Matters, Second Edition: Twenty-Six Conclusions from the Social Sciences states, "In 1960, more than 67percent of adults were married, whereas today fewer than 56 percent are married...These trends are even more dramatic in minority and lower income communities." 2.

Increases in divorce, single-parent families and children born out-of-wedlock are creating expensive personal and social tragedies as commitment to family as a social institution is replaced by self-orientation.

COST TO TAXPAYERS - $112 BILLION A YEAR

On April 15th, 2008 a landmark scholarly study was released entitled The Taxpayer Costs of Divorce and Unwed Childbearing: First-ever Estimates for the Nation and All 50 States. This report quantifies a minimum $112 billion annual taxpayer cost from high rates of divorce and unmarried childbearing. 3.

Ben Scafidi,Ph.D., the principle investigator of the study and economics professor at Georgia College & State University states, "These costs are due to increased taxpayer expenditures for anti-poverty, criminal justice and education programs, and through lower levels of taxes paid by individuals whose adult productivity has been negatively affected..."

Dr. David Blankenhorn, president of the Institute for American Values, notes, "Even a small improvement in the health of marriage in America would result in enormous savings...a 1 percent reduction in rates of family fragmentation would save taxpayers $1.1 billion."

DIVORCE

Divorce was once considered a last resort. It is now viewed as a liberating even creative experience, a means of finding oneself. However, we've seriously underestimated the long-term impact of divorce on children.

By almost every measure, children of divorce fare worse than their peers in intact families. The supportive network of family and friends is shattered. 4.

Millions of Americans have experienced the tragedies of divorce.

BORN OUT-OF-WEDLOCK

In 1960, 5 percent of children were born out-of-wedlock. In 2005, 34 percent of children were born outside of marriage. 5.

More and more American children are growing up with little experience of married life and little confidence that they could or want to be in satisfying marriage relationships.

WHERE'S DAD?

On June 15th (2008), many Americans honored their fathers on Father's Day. Fatherhood privileges children by providing physical protection, material resources, paternal cultural transmission, and day-to-day nurturing. 6.

However, 40 percent of children now live in a home without a father present. Men are increasingly leaving or being left out of family relationships. Fatherhood, the most socializing and civilizing role for men, is now often defined as a check in the mail, a weekend visit, or 'no dad at all'. This is a tragedy for both the fathers and the children.

Married men have lower rates of alcohol consumption and drug use, longer life expectancy, better health, and lower rates of injury, illness and disability. 7.

CONCLUSIONS FROM SOCIAL RESEARCH 8.

Research underscores time and again that one man and one woman joining together in a
permanent loving union is the best environment for raising healthy productive children.

The two parent home is a strong predictor of who will escape poverty.
Increases in child poverty since 1970 can be attributed to divorce and non-marital childbearing. (pg.19)

Cohabiting unions are much less stable than married unions. Cohabiting parents spend, on average, more income on alcohol and tobacco. (pg 13)

Children of unwed parents are more likely to have lower grades and to drop out of high school. (pg.22)

Children of divorced parents have higher rates of psychological distress, mental illness and increased rates of suicide. (pg 27)

Single or cohabiting mothers have higher rates of depression. Single mothers are overburdened by parenting alone. Cohabiting mothers are less confident that their relationship will last. (pg. 28)

Boys raised in single-parent families are more likely to engage in delinquent and criminal behaviors. (pg. 29)

Children not living with their two married parents are at greater risk for child abuse. (pg. 31)

MARRIAGE MATTERS

Marriage is more than a personal decision or an emotional relationship. Leading scholars from across the human sciences and across political perspectives who make up the Institute for American Values concur that "a healthy marriage culture is clearly a matter of legitimate public concern". In their report, Marriage Matters, they outline three fundamental conclusions. 9.

1. Marriage is an important social good, associated with...positive
outcomes for children and adults alike.

2. Marriage is an important public good, associated with a range
of economic, health, educational, and safety benefits...

3. The benefits of marriage extend to poor and minority communities,
even though marriage is fragile there.

A VISION FOR MARRIAGE RENEWAL

The weakening of marriage as an institution has been a fundamental factor contributing to the deteriorating well-being of adults and children and to an increase in poverty, especially for women and children.

As a society we need to move into a pro-active direction toward marriage support, marriage enrichment and family nurture. Joining hands, we can create a vision to strenthen and nurture family relationships, build stronger marriages and equip parents to raise their children surrounded by enduring love and support.

Let's start today!
We can do this!
YES WE CAN!

REFERENCES:

1. Institute for American Values. Why Marriage Matters, Second Edition: Twenty-six
Conclusions from the Social Sciences. New York, NY. 2005:pg. 15. www.americanvalues.org.
2. Ibid. pg. 5.
3. Weber, Sheila, Director of Communication, Institute for American Values.
"Marriage Breakdown Cost Taxpayers at Least $112 Billion a Year". April 15,
2008. Sheila@americanvalues.org.
4. "Divorce: The Pain That Doesn't Go Away". Family Voice. July/August, 2001, pg 1.
5. Institute for American Values. pg. 5.
6. Blankenhorn, David. Fatherless America: Confronting Our Most Urgent Social
Problem. NY: Harper Perennial. 1996.
7. Institute for American Values. pgs. 24-25.
8. Institute for American Values. Why Marriage Matters...
9. Institute for American Values. pg. 9.

A Father's Day Tribute

2008-06-11T14:24:00.000-07:00

My Dad (Weston Andrew Hare) would have enjoyed blogging. He liked to write down his musings and observations and share them with his family.

When he was 60, he and Mom (Elizabeth) retired to the old family house in Massachusetts, surrounded by stone wall fences, white birch trees, TALL pine and maple trees, and a pristine lake at the foot of the hills.

The following notes are selections from his "Gnome Gnotebook". He claimed to be 25% Irish, and Elves and Gnomes were often part of his stories.

UNCUT DIAMONDS
The first year I came here (1969) there were very many four-leaf clovers all around the place, it seemed to me.
Also I found in the lower garden a very nice Indian arrow head right on top of the garden. I still find some four leaf clovers, as I always have, but not that many, and I have found no more arrow heads, nor gold nuggets, nor uncut diamonds; tho' I look for them.

LEAF BOUNCERS
If you see a bunch of leaves bouncing like they had cricket legs, look carefully and you'll see a fox sparrow in the middle "kicking it up" as fox sparrows do.

RATS VERSUS SQUIRRELS
The rat has a very bad public image.
But squirrels are quite nice - cute - interesting and also good looking. They have, as far as I am concerned, a very good public image.
Yet squirrels and rats are both rodents - cousins you might say. Why the difference?

A rat is an 'orc' in the domain of the dark lord and has the characteristic of such.

A squirrel is like a 'hobbit' and in the domain of light. Why don't squirrels inhabit city slums, dumps, etc. and become wicked?

It's just not in their nature to do so, that's all.

AND BIRDS
People like birds. Of course people like birds. They are the residuum of the once great and benevolent race of Elves whose greatness has departed. But the echo of their benevolence remains in the songs, the bright color and general amiability of birds.

A tree full of blackbirds sounds a lot like water dropping into a hundred buckets. A bush full of sparrows also sounds pleasant - a 'bush of twitters'.

It would be interesting to make a record by superimposing many different bird calls repeated at random intervals so that a great medley of sound resulted.
(the tuning-up of the birds)

NATURE EMPATHY
To enjoy the course leading to a degree of Doctor of Nature one needs a 'degree' of Nature Empathy.
I seem to be accepted by the other inhabitants of the place to a certain extent. In the spring, twice a chickadee landed on my hand to get a sunflower seed. Moreover, the house sparrows (English Sparrows) out back scold me if I fail to throw them some seeds.

Then yesterday I was dumping some pulled weeds on the compost pile when I felt a thump on my back. It was a chipmunk using my back as a halfway point between the tree and the ground. He was a little embarrassed by his audacity and looked back at me with a SQUEEK as he dashed into a hole in the pile of leaves.

PRETTY THINGS
There are numerous pretty things in the world.

* The monarch chrysalis is certainly one.
* So are Japanese beetles. They may be bad, but here they feed mostly on the sterile grape vines along the wall. So I honor them for their beauty - black and iridescent.
* Bluegills are also very pretty to look at.

There are man-made things also that should be mentioned.
(1) The 'last drop' on the Maxwell House coffee label used to be a real gem of art. I bet it has been redesigned and lost. But the drop used to be colored brown with a little highlight of white with a slightly displaced miniscule red dot. It should have won a prize.
(2) The 5-pack of 'Maestro' cigars of Garcia y Vega has another example of a detail of real art. The name 'Maestro' is in green with a gold edge to the green which is best seen by changing the viewing angle when the green and gold make a most pleasing color combination, so I award the 2nd prize to the Garcia y Vega cigar box.

(Smoking cigars was Dad's only vice so he had a collection of cigar boxes in which he stored interesting things; such as bird feathers, shells, colored stones, stamps, pictures of grandchildren, etc.)

MONARCH BUTTERFLIES
There are a lot of Monarch butterflies this year. Maybe that is why I found a beautiful little chrysalis out in the garden which turned out to be the magic transformation case of a Monarch butterfly. It was a long time since I had considered these items.

This chrysalis was a blue-green waxy case that looked like plastic. It was decorated with a delicately made design of gold dots. Very elegantly made.
I put it away in a jar with grass and in a couple of days (our daughter-in-law) Anita noticed the butterfly coming out. I took pictures of the same and put it out on the Zinnia stalks to dry. The next day we saw it fly away.

No wonder they call these butterflies 'Monarch' since they are transformed in a royal gold-decorated case. I understand all these Monarch butterflies migrate south in the winter.
"So long, your majesties!"

DORMICE
I have heard of dormice through the years (e.g. Alice in Wonderland) but actually only encountered them after retiring to Oxford.

Dormouse means 'sleeping mouse' and refers also to the sleeping quarters they build to sleep in during the cold winter.

I found the first one in the lower garden as I was cleaning up the garden. There was a round ball of woven grass 3" or so in diameter, maybe 1/2" thick, with a sleeping mouse curled up tight inside. There was no hole in the ball. I left him sleeping in the ball. It was about time to awaken, I supposed.

In the fall of the year I found another one, not yet in use but well made with a hole left on the ball maybe 1/2" in diameter. Clearly the mouse if he later went in wove up the hole from the inside.

PIGEONS AND JAYS
I was watching the birds eating seeds out back when a blue jay and a mourning dove flew down to the same seed and bumped into one another.
I heard the blue jay say "Stupid pigeon! Why don't you look where you are going?"
The dove said "Peace! Brother" and waddled away, and the blue jay flew back up onto a branch.

THE FROG VISITOR
Tonight it is raining. I opened the porch door and a frog, sitting on the top step hopped right into the porch and then into the kitchen. I picked him up and told Elizabeth if she would kiss him, he might turn into a Prince. But she would not. So we let him out.

HOW TO LICK A PROBLEM
If you have a new problem, one in which you are in some degree familiar (i.e. not, for instance, like calling up the dead or moving a mountain into the sea), The First Rule must be: Don't Show Fear.

A problem knows when you're afraid of it, and fights twice as hard.
Not only that. All the little demons which are sitting around, and which are not, of themselves antagonists-to-the-solution of the problem, will reuse the fear and will start making trouble for you in their own domains.
All sorts of things can happen. You may stumble over your shadow, leave your keys in a locked house, stall your car and flood it, sit on the McDonald apple tart you have in your pocket, etc., etc.

Normally you would not do any of these things, but your fear has roused many psychic opponents! SO BE CALM, COOL, COLLECTED!

BITS OF WISDOM
The reason wise sayings are so concise: "Better late than never" etc., is because wise men are unable to gain the attention of people for more lengthy discourses.

Beware of those who say the plural of 'person' is 'people'. It is better to say 'persons' and preserve our integrity as individuals. Those who think of trees as timber plan to cut them down.

Beware of molehills. They may be mountains in disguise.

Remember, O Man, what you tolerate, you teach.

The government is a gigantic institution which hires James and John to rob Peter to pay Paul.

A bigot is one whose well-considered principles differ from your own.

I saw in the paper, "A mandate does not depend upon the size of the vote, but on the man himself." In other words, a mandate is when a man (thinks he)has a date with destiny.

It may follow the spirit of the law, but there is not a ghost of a chance that it follows the letter of the law.

LOSS OF AUTHORITY
(Written after I returned from the hospital after my long combat with hyperthyroidism.) I see I've lost a lot of authority since I got sick. Some of my previously obedient servants have deserted me. Specifically, I used to command 210# of gravity. When I jumped on a bale of wire to flatten it, all 210# were there.
But now 50 or so of my servants have left and only 160# still serve me.
My shadow also is diminished, which worries me some, considering the importance of a substantial shadow.

-----------------------

Dad lived to be 89. The last 8 years were struggles with Alzheimers disease.
Your shadow, Dad, remains substantial with those who loved and knew you.

The Endangered Black Family and Our Endangered Culture

2008-05-27T18:56:00.000-07:00

Bill Cosby and Dr. Alvin F. Poussaint courageously documented a social tragedy that has concerned social scientists for decades - the breakdown of the black family. In their book, Come On People: On the Path From Victims to Victors, they outline the problem and plead for change.
They conclude: "No more excuses, no more delays. Come on people!" 1.

Breakdown of marriage

In the 1950's, black and white marriage patterns were much alike.
* In 1960, 66% of all black women aged 30-34 were married.
* By 1990, the figure had dropped to 39%. 2.
* Divorce and separation rates for blacks are now 50% higher than for whites. 3.
* In 1950, five out of six black children were born into a two-parent home.
* Now 70% of black children are born outside of marriage. 4.

Consequences of fatherlessness

Fatherhood is the most socializing and civilizing role for men; however, many black men are caught in the cultural demand to 'be cool' and emotionally detached. 5.

The hard truth is that most social problems are the direct consequences of fatherless households.

Children born to unwed mothers are ten times more likely to live in poverty.

Sobering federal statistics report that children from fatherless homes include: 6.
* 63% of teen suicides
* 70% of juveniles in state-operated institutions
* 71% of high-school dropouts
* 75% of children in chemical-abuse centers
* 80% of youth in prison
* 85% of children with behavioral disorders
* 90% of homeless and runaway children

The black high school drop-out rate is greater than 50% in many cities, with male drop-out rate higher than female. 7.

Black crime rates

* Close to half of the prison population (now about 2.2 million) are African-American. 8.
* African-Americans are 12% of the population but represent 56% of those arrested for murder and 50% of those arrested for forcible rape and violent crimes.
* Black against black homicide is the leading cause of death among black men ages 16-34.
* One out of every 21 young black men is murdered.
* 32% of all black males ages 20-29 are in jail, prison or on probation or parole. 9.

Sexually Transmitted Diseases (STD's)

* In March, 2008 the Center for Disease Control and Prevention reported that nearly 50% of black teens had an STD, while 20% of white and Hispanic teens were so affected. 10.

* Black homosexual relationships have led to tragic consequences.
Male-to-male sexual contact (MSM) is the primary cause of HIV/AIDS transmission.
In 2005, AIDS cases in the U.S. for Blacks (20,187) exceeded the number for Whites, Hispanics, Asians and American Indians. combined (19,939). 11.

* Bisexual and heterosexual relationships spread the HIV virus to black women and children. In 2004, HIV infection was the leading cause of death for African-American women aged 35-44. 12.

Black role models

The media has elevated black role models who disdain responsible sexual relationships and marriage.

Black male rappers, particularly gangsta rappers, have churned out a hip, bold, profane style with antisocial, angry, women-hating messages. 13 Success is measured by having as much money and sex as possible. Women are seen as bitches and hos and men as pimps.

In February of 2008, the Bad Boy Entertainment founder, Sean (Puff Daddy) Combs is quoted as saying, "I'm cool, man... I've never been married, never been engaged." Combs has fathered 6 children by 3 different women. 14.

The pop singer, Beyonce, is expanding her house of fashion design to sell a line of clothes to children. Ads present 7 year old girls dressed in bling, leather, lipstick, and heels, seductively
posed to look like tarts. 15.

As the media promote sexuality and pornography, Pimp and Ho Parties are now being promoted as the 'in' way to have fun. 16.

Grief and Frustration

It is with grief and frustration that I consider these tragic statistics because statistics are not numbers. They represent human lives, hurting and failing to reach potential.

In August of 1963, my husband and I lived outside Washington DC. On August 28, a carload from our (white, suburban) church went to the Washington Mall to join the March on Washington for Jobs and Freedom. We stood with 200,000 people as Martin Luther King, Jr. delivered his "I Have a Dream" speech. We affirmed his concern that people be judged not by the color of their skin but by the content of their character.

Schools, colleges and universities have opened doors of opportunity to blacks and all Americans. Government and charitable organizations have provided assistance for food, clothing and housing for those needing a hand up.

From Victim to Responsible Citizen

I join the cry of Bill Cosby and Alvin Poussaint when they say,

"No more excuses, no more delays. Come on people!

I add the call to move from victims to responsible citizens!

References

1. Cosby, Bill and Alvin F. Poussaint, MD. Come On People - on the Path From Victims to Victors. Thomas Nelson. Nashville. 2007.
2. Palen, J. John. Social Problems for the Twenty-First Century. McGraw Hill Pub. 2001:291.
3. Cosby, pg. 17.
4. Cosby, pgs. 2,14.
5. Cosby, pg. 11
6. Alexander, Mark M. "Fatherless in America." June 17,2005. www.townhall.com/Common.
7. Cosby, pg. 108.
8. Cosby, pg. 192.
9. Palen, pgs. 342,243.
10. The Associated Press. March 11, 2008. "1 in 4 teen girls has at least one STD". http://www.msnbc.com/id/23574940.
11. http://www.cdc.gov/hiv/topics/surveillance/print/basic.htm. 9/8/2007.
12. http://www.cdc.gov/hiv/topics/women/resources/factsheets. Revised June 2007.
13. Cosby, pgs. 12,16,119.
14. Brady, James. "In Step with Sean Combs." Parade Magazine. February 24, 2008. page 26.
15. www.parentdish.com/2008/05/12/beyonce-sexing-up-childresn-clothing.
16. www.ehow.com/how_2067020-throw-pimp-ho-party.html.