05/13/2010
For the life of me, I don't know what single women "by choice" tell their sons about what to look forward to in their futures.'"Randy" sent me the front page of her local newspaper, with an article touting "Moms Single By Choice."'' Randy writes:
[The article is about w]omen in their late 30s or 40s who have no husbands but want a kid.' A few adopt, while sperm bank fertilization impregnates many of them.
I have learned from listening to your radio program for the past two years that a woman's selfish desire to have a kid should be trumped by the needs of a child who would be best brought up in a two-parent family - mom and dad, married, with a stable home.
Ninety percent of the article promotes this behavior as an acceptable "choice."' The article explains the pain a woman goes through when she realizes that Mr. Right is not coming as they age into their late 30s or early 40s.' The article sympathizes with these brave career women who can afford full-time nannies and day care.' One woman is quoted as saying that this was 'the best decision she ever made,' while the final word plainly says to 'go for it.'' There are a couple of brief paragraphs buried late in the article mentioning the conservative point of view.' It states that hundreds of studies have shows that mom and dad homes are superior to single-parent homes.' Also, very briefly stated is that 'choice mothers are, in effect, teaching their children that men are not important to families, marriages, or children.'
I sympathize with the children of these single moms "by choice."' They are intentionally robbed of a father.' More than traditional money-earning, protecting and fixing things around the house, the dad does something else.' He has a place in the family where he shows monogamy and daily behavior as a father and man should behave.' He is a role model, and an example of the kind of person sons should grow up to resemble, and daughters should grow up to look for."
Hey, Randy, in this "PC" and feminist-brainwashed society, whatever an adult wants always trumps what children need!' If a woman who never bothered to become "Miss Right," does want to devote herself to raising a child (without nannies and day-care), I'm all for her adopting an older or difficult-to-place child.' Now,
that
would be a God-send.
More >>
|
Tags: Abortion, Family, Family/Relationships - Children, Family/Relationships - Family, Parenting, Relatives, Values
|
PERMALINK |
EMAIL | PRINT | RSS |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
05/13/2010
Talk about dangerous and destructive!' A Johnson County (Kansas) grand jury is investigating Planned "Un"Parenthood to determine whether the abortion provider complies with Kansas laws on parental notification and the 24-hour waiting period.The grand jury panel has asked for medical records of sixteen women who had abortions in 2003.' Planned Parenthood is refusing to turn them over, claiming patient privacy right violations.' However, the grand jury wants the following patient information:' date of birth, date of last menstruation, dates and times of medical procedures, and notifications and/or consultations with patients.' The grand jury is not asking for any patient-identifying information like name, social security number, address, phone numbers or next of kin - they can be eliminated before the information is sent on to them.' So much for patient privacy violations.Additionally (according to the
Kansas City Star
), charges allege that Planned Parenthood performed illegal later-term abortions in 2003 and falsified, forged, and failed to maintain related records.The ACLU and Planned Parenthood are also pushing San Diego's school board to end long-standing policies which require parental notification when students are pregnant and contemplating abortion, and parental consent before students leave campus, including trips to abortion clinics. The ACLU and Planned Parenthood are claiming that this violates the privacy rights of students and that the mentality is "antiquated and dangerous."'I've had conversations with some of these ACLU and Planned Parenthood types over the years, and it's absolutely scary how paranoid they are about parental involvement in their children's lives.' They are thoroughly convinced, it would seem, that parents universally impregnate and/or beat their children, and that only
they
are the grand protectors of children.' If that's so, I wonder why Planned Parenthood gets in trouble for not reporting molestations when adult males bring in minor females for abortions?' Gets mighty confusing to me.Happily, the Pacific Justice Institute (PJI) sent a letter to the school board, urging them to stand by their parent and family-friendly policies and offered free legal assistance if those policies are challenged in court.' PJI President, Brad Dacus stated in the Standard Newswire that
"Contrary to ACLU and Planned Parenthood propaganda, parental responsibility is not antiquated or illegal.' It is indispensable to a decent society.' We urge the San Diego School Board not to cave in to pressure from radicals who ignore common sense and distort constitutional principles."
PJI's affiliate attorney commented:
"Parents are morally and legally responsible for their minor children, so it is just common sense that they should be aware of their children's whereabouts, particularly if they are being subjected to life-altering medical procedures, such as abortions."
More >>
|
Tags: Family, Family/Relationships - Family, Planned Parenthood, Relationships, Relatives, Social Issues
|
PERMALINK |
EMAIL | PRINT | RSS |
|
|
|