Fifth Generation

Here is a link to a news story in December about the judge overturning a decision to teach intelligent design as part of the curriculum.

This angers me, not because I necessarily agree with Intelligent Design, but because it proves how closed minded the liberal mind is. I believe some of the great scientist like Newton and Einstein believed in some form of intelligent design. Also, the Big Bang theory has not been exactly proved. The theory that humans came from monkeys still has that missing link. (I studied this in Anthropology, very interesting, but no link proved)Why not teach the different theories on how the earth was created? As far as I know, isn’t it the educator’s goal to teach the student how to think, not what to think? When will we bring back the old classes of rhetoric, logic, and arithmetic? By the way, science fell into the category of logic. So if one can use logic to prove intelligent design, it should be taught as PART of the curriculum.

On the other hand, I do not like when evangelical parents teach their children at home, and do not teach them the alternative, Evolution Theory. If there is more than one logical theory on how the earth was created, then in my opinion, both should be taught, and the child should learn to use logic. And yes, I believe you can use logic to prove God created the earth. Just my opinion, anyway.

I would love to hear from educators and parents what they think. I know some may disagree with me. I would especially like to hear more about Logic. This is America, and that is what is great about this country.

• Leave a comment... (3)

As a woman, I consider myself to be a feminist. I believe in the right to be feminine and that as woman I need to be protected from violence and abuse. I believe that women should have the ability to choose the life they want to live. I believe that women have a political voice and should be respected. I also believe that women have a right to education and freedom of expression. I don’t believe that some women are sluts and others are angels. I believe that just as a man can repent of his sexual misconduct, so can a woman. However, I believe that women are different from men and have different roles in society. Women are wives and mothers, men are husbands and fathers. This is the feminism that I believe in.

On the other hand, most of society knows of an uglier, more dangerous feminism. I want to point out that the dangerous feminism referred to in the title refers to the extremist far- left feminism that fights for equality as described in the Equal Rights Amendment, abortion rights, free sexuality and pornography, and the destruction of gender roles.

Since the 1960’s and especially the 1970’s, this brand of feminism has done more to hurt the Western world than any other of the “post- Christian” ideologies. One the ways it has hurt the Western World more than any other liberal ideology is that the birthrate has declined. Women concentrating on careers, rather than hitching up with the perfect bread-winner are getting married at an older age and having less children. If the liberated woman happens to get pregnant, she can use her right to have an abortion. It is no surprise that the birthrate of the nations of Europe and North America are declining and extremist, marxist feminism has much to do with this decline.

As the liberated, yuppie, spoiled Western families have less children, the unliberated, abused women of the Muslim world are increasing in number. Here is a list of the highest birthrates. I know that #5 Chad, and #6 Somalia, still practice female circumcision or mutilation. Afghanistan, #4, though no longer under the Taliban, still is not a great example of treating women with respect.

Now look at the countries with the lowest birth rates. Except for Japan and Singapore, they are all in Europe (I count Georgia as part of Europe). Japan, though culturally very different, has a Western style government based on the British system.

The extreme Feminists continue to fight against any who want to keep the good old fashioned family values (not all family values are against women). A woman who wishes to desire for family, children, and a man is considered a Puritan prude. Hillary Clinton is the hero, rather than Laura or Barbara Bush.

Having these powerful women as role models, and telling women lies about abortion (that abortion, even the legal way can cause damage if not physically, but definately emotionally, and does not teach women the consequences of abortion)are huring society by lwering the birth rate of those who fight for the very freedoms that allow them to rally in Washington DC.

Mark Steyn wrote this in his column:

Just before the 2004 election, that eminent political analyst Cameron Diaz appeared on the Oprah Winfrey show to explain what was at stake:

“Women have so much to lose. I mean, we could lose the right to our bodies. . . . If you think that rape should be legal, then don’t vote. But if you think that you have a right to your body,” she advised Oprah’s viewers, “then you should vote.”

Poor Cameron. A couple of weeks later, the scary people won. She lost all rights to her body. Unlike Alec Baldwin, she couldn’t even move to France. Her body was grounded in Terminal D.

But, after framing the 2004 presidential election as a referendum on the right to rape, Miss Diaz might be interested to know that men enjoy that right under many Islamic legal codes around the world. In his book “The Empty Cradle,” Philip Longman asks: “So where will the children of the future come from? Increasingly they will come from people who are at odds with the modern world. Such a trend, if sustained, could drive human culture off its current market-driven, individualistic, modernist course, gradually creating an anti-market culture dominated by fundamentalism–a new Dark Ages.”

Bottom line for Cameron Diaz: There are worse things than John Ashcroft out there.” (Mark Steyn, opinionjournal.com)

So as the feminist rally on for the right of a female to kill her fetus, and the celebrity stick figured women spread their misguided politics to young girls, the culture they hold dear, that gives the the right to abort babies, is itself dying. At the same time, cultures which oppress women and even practice honor killings, which is in essence a legal murder of a women, continue to grow. As a woman, I believe that I can be respected and have the right of expression and the same pay as a man, yet believe that my top priority is to become a mother. Instead of buying a fancy S.U.V. or those designer shoes, I want to use my extra money to pay for my children’s food, shelter, and education. Instead of spending so much time in a career that will die with me, I would rather spend time bringing lives into the world that will carry my name and my beliefs in truth and freedom on to another generation.

• Leave a comment... (0)

The Cost of Uzbek White Gold

• Leave a comment... (0)

I ran across this very interesting article written by Olivia Albrecht who is the John Tower National Security Fellow with the Center for Security Policy in Washington, D.C.
I couldn’t believe when I read that America’s enemies have exploited our immigration system over and over and Congress still hasn’t done anything about it.

The problem of immigration should be dealt immediately. Read to find out more.
(another immigration blog entry
http://newmetromother.blogspot.com/2005/12/tancredo-bill.html#links)

“Illegal or fraudulent immigration into the United States is an important tool in the toolkits of America’s enemies – and it has been exploited tirelessly, and tragically, all too successfully.

The problems resulting from the amenable and porous borders of the United States have metastasized beyond the socio-economic concerns of ruinous welfare and health care loads, and unemployment. The immigration issue has been elevated to a critical problem of national security that demands our attention.

Despite the superficial correlation between lax immigration and frequently incompetent immigration policy and terrorism prevention, immigration concerns have all too often taken a backseat in the War on Terror to military action, the freezing of terrorist finances, innovative diplomatic developments, intelligence reform, and key security measures at airports and other transportation systems.

Undoubtedly, these security measures have drastically improved our capacity to thwart our enemies from orchestrating plots against our country; however, the threat posed by the immigration crisis remains under-attended by Washington policy officials.

Earlier this week, the Center for Immigration Studies released startling numbers extrapolated from the last half decade (2000-2005), wherein they determined that 7.9 million new immigrants, both legal and illegal, settled in the United States – marking this time period the highest five-year period of immigration in American history. CIS estimates that nearly half of the post-2000 immigrant arrivals – 3.7 million – are illegal aliens.

Additionally, the number of immigrants in the United States as of March 2005 is the highest in American history – 35.2 million or 12.1 percent of the total U.S. population. The statistics reveal unsettling details on the demographics of these new immigrants.

For example, 31 percent have not completed a high school education (three-and-a-half times the rate for natives) and 29 percent of immigrant-headed households use at least one major welfare program (compared to the 18 percent for native households).

In addition, one-third of immigrants lack health insurance (two-and-a-half times the rate for natives), and one-quarter of those in poverty are immigrants and their children. The problem extends beyond a domestic, socio-economic crisis and reaches into the depths of terrorism prevention and national security policies.

America must apply common sense to comprehend that voluminous immigration – arguably the greatest influx America has ever experienced – and the resulting loophole-susceptible system facilitates terrorist operatives in America.

Terrorists are exploiting our generous, welcoming arms, shared history as an immigrant nation and political ambivalence toward loathing illegal immigration while rejecting “anti-immigration” rhetoric and action to conduct terrorist activities against America.

In an extremely informative paper, “Immigration Benefits and Terrorism: Moving Beyond the 9/11 Staff Report on Terrorist Travel,” written by Janice Kephart, counsel to the 9/11 commission, Kephart details the immigration histories of 94 terrorists who operated in the United States from the early 1990s and through 2004, including six Sept. 11 hijackers who sought enhanced immigration benefits.

Kephart’s research is definitive: “Terrorists, both before and after 9/11, have and will continue to exploit the weaknesses of our lax immigration system by committing fraud and other violations.”

Of the 94 foreign-born terrorists who operated in the United States in her study, two-thirds (59 percent) were found to have committed immigration fraud prior to or in conjunction with taking part in terrorist activity. Of the 59 percent that violated the law, there were cumulatively 79 immigration violations.

Once in the United States, 23 terrorists became legal permanent residents. And 21 foreign terrorists became naturalized U.S. citizens. Terrorists need the guise of legal immigration status to support their terrorist activities on U.S. soil.

Kephart continues that “these gaps in our immigration system will remain exploited until the system becomes designed to catch terrorists better,” the U.S. can provide sufficient resources to such reforms and there is the “political will to enforce the law.”

Unfortunately, the entangled immigration problem impedes direct action and consideration for this critical issue. Politicians fear the heavy topic of immigration reform and have, therefore, side-stepped it in exchange for more resolutely agreed upon terrorism prevention tactics, such as airport security or intelligence reform.

However, with the advent of the CIS immigration report, the impending congressional vote on preliminary immigration reforms and the president’s budding interest in this topic, the facts remain – America’s enemies have exploited our immigration system – most particularly, the Sept. 11 hijackers – and the mass immigration has strained our mediocre system to the point of ineffectiveness.

To be fair, months after Sept. 11 the national security perspective of immigration was considered with the utmost seriousness.

For example, the agencies responsible for immigration made significant changes to the way in which our immigration systems operate. U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services resolved to investigate the 300,000-plus foreigners who have absconded after being ordered deported, and in conjunction, these names were entered into the FBI’s national crime database.

However, if the United States is truly attuned to the critical national security perspective of the immigration crisis in America, we must unilaterally agree to reform our immigration system expeditiously in the name of protecting Americans.

Regretfully, it is questionable whether merely strict enforcement of immigration law will sufficiently protect America. At this point, policymakers must accept this hotly contested topic and develop actionable solutions before it’s too late.

The relation among mass immigration, illegal entry and fraud resulting in an overloaded bureaucracy and America’s national security is real.”

• Leave a comment... (0)

• Leave a comment... (1)