All posts by Wintery Knight

https://winteryknight.com/
News

British government plans to spend 400 million pounds to spy on problem families

Leave a comment

Story from the Daily Express via Canadian blog Dust My Broom. (H/T ECM)

Excerpt:

They will be monitored to ensure that children attend school, go to bed on time and eat proper meals.

Private security guards will also be sent round to carry out home checks, while parents will be given help to combat drug and alcohol addiction.

Around 2,000 families have gone through these Family Intervention Projects so far.

But ministers want to target 20,000 more in the next two years, with each costing between £5,000 and £20,000 – a potential total bill of £400million.

Let’s see. The government of Britain embraced secularism, feminism and marxism by electing the left-wing Labor party continuously for over a decade.

  • Secularism destroys objective moral values and duties
  • Feminism destroys marriage and parenting
  • Marxism destroys prosperity and responsibility

How did it help children to undermine morality, marriage and prosperity? How does it help the most vulnerable people in society to debunk all of the institutions that are needed to protect and nurture them?

Commentary

Robert P. George explains why same-sex marriage is morally wrong

1 Comment

Famous Princeton University professor writing in the Wall Street Journal. (H/T ECM)

This is the best single article I’ve read on same-sex marriage.

Excerpt:

If marriage is redefined, its connection to organic bodily union—and thus to procreation—will be undermined. It will increasingly be understood as an emotional union for the sake of adult satisfaction that is served by mutually agreeable sexual play. But there is no reason that primarily emotional unions like friendships should be permanent, exclusive, limited to two, or legally regulated at all. Thus, there will remain no principled basis for upholding marital norms like monogamy.

A veneer of sentiment may prevent these norms from collapsing—but only temporarily. The marriage culture, already wounded by widespread divorce, nonmarital cohabitation and out-of-wedlock childbearing will fare no better than it has in those European societies that were in the vanguard of sexual “enlightenment.” And the primary victims of a weakened marriage culture are always children and those in the poorest, most vulnerable sectors of society.

Candid and clear-thinking advocates of redefining marriage recognize that doing so entails abandoning norms such as monogamy. In a 2006 statement entitled “Beyond Same-Sex Marriage,” over 300 lesbian, gay, and allied activists, educators, lawyers, and community organizers—including Gloria Steinem, Barbara Ehrenreich, and prominent Yale, Columbia and Georgetown professors—call for legally recognizing multiple sex partner (“polyamorous”) relationships. Their logic is unassailable once the historic definition of marriage is overthrown.

You know, there’s no law that says that we could not strengthen marriage if we wanted to. Just saying. Children do better when conceived and raised in stable environments with a strong exclusive bond between two opposite-sex parents. Do we care about children’s welfare? If so, then we need strong marriages.

News

Democrats introduce amendment to allow taxpayer funding for abortions

1 Comment

Story from the Weekly Standard. (H/T Secondhand Smoke via ECM)

Excerpt:

Instead of the Stupak-Pitts amendment [preventing abortion funding in public option], the committee passed an amendment that is being billed by some Democrats as a “common ground” measure on abortion. The amendment–sponsored by Lois Capps (D-Calif.), whose National Right to Life Committee vote-scorecard is 0 for 74–would allow the “public option” to provide coverage for elective abortions and would allow federally subsidized private plans to provide abortion coverage as well. How exactly could this be construed as “common ground”? Congress isn’t requiring the public option to cover abortion–merely allowing it. And through some nifty bookkeeping, abortions will supposedly be paid for out of private funds rather than tax dollars…

Because money is fungible, it’s difficult to say that tax dollars wouldn’t fund abortions through this plan. Douglas Johnson of the National Right to Life Committee says, “Federal subsidies would also flow to private plans that cover elective abortions, under meaningless bookkeeping schemes — and the amendment actually creates a federal mandate that there must be at least one private abortion plan in each premium rating areas of the health insurance exchange.”

Wesley J. Smith writes:

A health unwanted pregnancy is not an illness. When a woman decides to terminate that pregnancy,  it should be her (and/or the father’s) responsibility, just like elective cosmetic surgery. This turn of events also illustrates how health care reform isn’t just about expanding medical coverage–but about impacting the culture.

When the government provides subsidies for a behavior, the frequency will increase, because the cost is lowered. Therefore, the Democrats are PRO-ABORTION. They want more abortions. They are in favor of killing innocent people. They are in favor of allowing people to kill unborn babies just because they are female (sex-selection abortions). They don’t care about the consciences of pro-life taxpayers – we have to support this, too.

Previously, I explained how Obama is the most pro-abortion President ever.

Additional pro-life resources